. 2019 Aug 9;34(9):853–861. doi: 10.1007/s10654-019-00548-9

Table 3.

Associations between total dietary antioxidant capacity and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR)

	Total population (n = 5422)	P value	Men (n = 2135)	P value	Women (n = 3287)	P value
Model 1^a	− 0.04 (− 0.06; − 0.03)	< 0.001	− 0.03 (− 0.06; − 0.01)	0.005	− 0.06 (− 0.08; − 0.03)	< 0.001
Model 2^b	− 0.04 (− 0.05; − 0.03)	< 0.001	− 0.03 (− 0.05; − 0.01)	0.001	− 0.05 (− 0.07; − 0.03)	< 0.001
Model 3^c	− 0.04 (− 0.06; − 0.03)	< 0.001	− 0.03 (− 0.06; − 0.01)	0.002	− 0.05 (− 0.07; − 0.03)	< 0.001

Total population
(n = 5422)

P value

Men
(n = 2135)

P value

Women
(n = 3287)

P value

Model 1^a

− 0.04

(− 0.06; − 0.03)

< 0.001

− 0.03

(− 0.06; − 0.01)

0.005

− 0.06

(− 0.08; − 0.03)

< 0.001

Model 2^b

− 0.04

(− 0.05; − 0.03)

< 0.001

− 0.03

(− 0.05; − 0.01)

0.001

− 0.05

(− 0.07; − 0.03)

< 0.001

Model 3^c

− 0.04

(− 0.06; − 0.03)

< 0.001

− 0.03

(− 0.06; − 0.01)

0.002

− 0.05

(− 0.07; − 0.03)

< 0.001

Results are presented as regression coefficient (95% confidence interval) for a standard deviation increment in FPAP score

^aModel 1: adjusted for age, sex and Rotterdam Study cohort

^bModel 2: model 1 + body mass index, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, highest level of education attained, physical activity and smoking status

^cModel 3: model 2 + degree of adherence to dietary guidelines, total daily energy intake and daily alcohol intake