Table 3.

Hazard Ratios for of Incident Type 2 Diabetes According to Intake of Heme Iron, the Singapore Chinese Health Study, 1993–2010

Iron Type and Model	Quartile of Iron Intake
	1					4
	No. of Cases	No. of Person Years	Median	HR	95% CI	No. of Cases	No. of Person Years	Median	HR	95% CI	P for Trenda
Heme iron	1,181	124,549	0.21			1,446	124,505	0.64
Model 1b				1.00	Referent				1.24	1.15, 1.34	<0.001
Model 2c				1.00	Referent				1.24	1.14, 1.34	<0.001
Model 3d				1.00	Referent				1.23	1.13, 1.34	<0.001
Model 3d with poultry and fish				1.00	Referent				1.23	1.09, 1.38	0.001
Model 3d with red meat				1.00	Referent				1.14	1.02, 1.28	0.034
Nonheme iron	1,347	127,128	6.07			1,295	120,180	9.38
Model 1b				1.00	Referent				1.04	0.96, 1.12	0.454
Model 2c				1.00	Referent				1.02	0.94, 1.11	0.770
Model 3d				1.00	Referent				0.94	0.83, 1.06	0.256
Model 3d with poultry and fish				1.00	Referent				0.96	0.85, 1.08	0.436
Model 3d with red meat				1.00	Referent				0.97	0.86, 1.09	0.556

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.

^a Linear trend was tested by treating the median intake values of quartiles as continuous variables using Cox proportional hazards models.

^b Adjusted for age, sex, dialect, year of interview, and educational level.

^c Adjusted for the variables in model 1 and body mass index, physical activity level, smoking status, alcohol use, baseline history of self-reported hypertension, adherence to the vegetable-, fruit-, and soy-rich dietary pattern, and total energy intake.

^d Adjusted for the variables in model 2 (except for dietary patterns) and dietary intakes of egg, soy, nonsoy legumes, vegetables, fruit, noodles, rice, nuts and seeds, coffee, and soda.