Table 3.
Patterns | Age (Years) | p-Value | BMI (kg/m2) | p-Value | BF% | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
P1: Snacking | ||||||
T1 | 31.9 ± 8.7 * | 0.011 a | 24.2 ± 3.7 | 31.9 ± 7.3 | ||
T2 | 29.9 ± 8.0 c | 25.2 ± 4.8 | 32.1 ± 8.4 | |||
T3 | 33.9 ± 7.9 c | 25.9 ± 6.5 | 33.7 ± 8.5 | |||
P2: Energy-dense meat | 0.016 b | |||||
T1 | 32.8 ± 8.2 *,e | 0.012 a | 24.6 ± 4.2 *,e | 32.2 ± 7.4 | 0.016 b | |
T2 | 32.9 ± 8.1 d | 24.4 ± 4.0 d | 31.4 ± 7.2 | |||
T3 | 30.0 ± 8.3 d,e | 26.4 ± 6.7 d,e | 34.3 ± 9.2 | |||
P3: Fruit and vegetable | ||||||
T1 | 31.7 ± 7.8 | 24.8 ± 4.4 | 33.2 ± 7.2 | |||
T2 | 31.1 ± 8.4 | 24.4 ± 4.3 | 31.5 ± 7.2 | |||
T3 | 32.9 ± 8.6 | 26.2 ± 6.4 | 33.1 ± 9.5 | |||
P4: Healthy | ||||||
T1 | 32.2 ± 8.6 | 25.2 ± 4.8 | 33.7 ± 7.5 | |||
T2 | 31.6 ± 8.6 | 25.5 ± 5.6 | 33.0 ± 8.1 | |||
T3 | 31.9 ± 7.6 | 24.8 ± 5.1 | 31.1 ± 8.4 |
Values are means ± standard deviations; T1, T2, T3 = tertiles of dietary pattern score; * p <0.05 following ANOVA analysis within each pattern, between tertiles; a = energy controlled for; b = age controlled for, c–e = values with the same superscript letters are significantly different according to both Tukey HSD and Gabriel post hoc tests.