Table 3.
Mean (s.e.) changes in energy density, BMI and percent weight loss among participants with decreased, stable or increased LED and HED food intake (n =183)
| 6-month changes |
6-month outcomes | 18-month outcomes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| LED | HED | LED | HED | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| Decreased (<−1 unit) |
Stable (between −1 and 1 unit) |
Increased (>1 unit) |
Decreased (<−1 unit) |
Stable (between −1 and 1 unit) |
Increased (>1 unit) |
Decreased (<−1 unit) |
Stable (between −1 and 1 unit) |
Increased (>1 unit) |
Decreased (<−1 unit) |
Stable (between −1 and 1 unit) |
Increased (>1 unit) |
|
| ED change (kcal g−1) | ||||||||||||
| Model 1 | − 0.24 (0.09)a | − 0.29 (0.07)a | − 0.62 (0.06)b | − 0.62 (0.06)a | − 0.29 (0.06)b | − 0.26 (0.12)b | − 0.24 (0.09)a | − 0.25 (0.07)a | − 0.59 (0.05)b | − 0.57 (0.06)b | − 0.29 (0.06)a | − 0.25 (0.11)a |
| Model 2 | − 0.36 (0.10)a | − 0.40 ± (0.10)a | − 0.74 (0.10)b | − 0.70 (0.10)a | − 0.36 (0.10)b | − 0.37 (0.20)b | − 0.31 (0.12)a | − 0.31 (0.10)a | − 0.65 (0.10)b | − 0.59 (0.09)b | − 0.30 (0.09)a | − 0.29 (0.15)a |
| Model 3 | − 0.21 (0.13)a | − 0.32 ± (0.10)a | − 0.66 (0.10)b | − 0.65 (0.09)a | − 0.31 (0.09)b | − 0.22 (0.15)b | − 0.17 (0.12)a | − 0.24 (0.10)a | − 0.57 (0.09)b | − 0.55 (0.09)b | − 0.26 (0.09)a | − 0.16 (0.14)a |
| Changes in BMI (kg m−2) | ||||||||||||
| Model 1 | − 3.1 (0.4)a | − 4.0 (0.3)a,b | − 4.2 (0.2)b | − 3.8 (0.2) | − 4.0 (0.2) | − 4.1 (0.5) | − 2.9 (0.4) | − 3.8 (0.3) | − 3.9 (0.3) | − 3.6 (0.3) | − 3.8 (0.3) | − 3.9 (0.5) |
| Model 2 | − 2.4 (0.5)a | − 3.4 (0.4)a,b | − 3.5 (0.4)b | − 3.2 (0.4) | − 3.4 (0.4) | − 3.4 (0.4) | − 2.2 (0.5) | − 3.2 (0.4) | − 3.2 (0.4) | − 2.9 (0.4) | − 3.1 (0.4) | − 3.1 (0.7) |
| Model 3 | − 2.4 (0.5)a | − 3.3 (0.4)a,b | − 3.5 (0.4)b | − 3.0 (0.4) | − 3.2 (0.4) | − 3.0 (0.6) | − 2.2 (0.6) | − 3.2 (0.5) | − 3.2 (0.4) | − 2.8 (0.4) | − 3.0 (0.4) | − 2.7 (0.7) |
| Percent weight loss (%) | ||||||||||||
| Model 1 | − 9.2 (1.0) | − 11.1 (0.7) | − 11.9 (0.6) | − 10.9 (0.6) | − 11.4 (0.7) | − 11.3 (1.3) | − 8.8 (1.2) | − 10.8 (0.9) | − 11.6 (0.7) | − 10.4 (0.7) | − 10.9 (0.8) | − 10.8 (1.5) |
| Model 2 | − 7.4 (1.3) | − 9.5 (1.1) | − 9.9 (1.1) | − 9.1 (1.0) | − 9.5 (1.1) | − 9.2 (1.6) | − 7.0 (1.4) | − 9.0 (1.2) | − 9.2 (1.1) | − 8.6 (1.1) | − 9.0 (1.1) | − 8.7 (1.8) |
| Model 3 | − 7.1 (1.4) | − 9.3 (1.2) | − 9.8 (1.1) | − 8.8 (1.0) | − 9.0 (1.1) | − 8.3 (1.7) | − 6.9 (1.5) | − 9.0 (1.2) | − 9.2 (1.1) | − 8.2 (1.1) | − 8.5 (1.1) | − 7.8 (1.8) |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; ED, energy density; HED, high-energy-dense foods; LED, low-energy-dense foods. Changes in number of LED or HED foods were categorized into three categories: decreased (< − 1), stable (−1 to 1) and Increased (>1). Tukey adjustment was used for all post-hoc comparisons. Labeled means in a row under the same change period and independent variable without a common superscript differ (P<0.05). Because the interactions between group and LED and HED and the interactions between LED and HED were not significant, there was no interaction terms in all models. Model 1 adjusts for group, age and sex. Model 2 adjusts for the covariates in Model 1, as well as race (white versus non-white) and education (some college education, college graduate or post-graduate). Model 3 adjusts for the covariates in previous models and change in number of HED or LED foods. There are 33 participants in the decreased LED group, 60 in the stable LED group and 90 in the increased LED group. There are 85 participants in the decreased HED group, 76 in the stable HED group and 22 in the increased HED group.