Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Sep 28.
Published in final edited form as: Br J Nutr. 2019 Jan 11;121(4):461–468. doi: 10.1017/S0007114518003513

Appendix Table 3.

LCD score and prevalence and amount of CAC at baseline among non-diabetic participants (Cross-sectional)

CAC prevalence (N=2,335) at baseline (N=4,986) Baseline CAC amount in those with CAC>0 at baseline (N=2,335)

Prevalence ratio 95% CI* Regression coefficient SE*

Overall LCD score
 Q1 - -
 Q2 1.05 0.98, 1.12 10.9 8.9
 Q3 1.01 0.94, 1.09 10.9 9.3
 Q4 1.02 0.95, 1.10 1.0 9.9
 Q5 1.01 0.93, 1.10 −9.7 10.7
P for linear trend 0.91 0.44
Animal-based LCD score
 Q1 - -
 Q2 1.02 0.96, 1.09 13.3 8.8
 Q3 0.98 0.91, 1.05 −0.7 9.4
 Q4 0.98 0.91, 1.05 −15.4 9.9
 Q5 1.00 0.93, 1.08 −5.0 9.9
P for linear trend 0.45 0.22
Plant-based LCD score
 Q1 - -
 Q2 1.02 0.95, 1.09 5.3 9.3
 Q3 1.02 0.95, 1.09 −2.0 9.4
 Q4 0.99 0.92, 1.06 −5.2 9.4
 Q5 1.03 0.95, 1.11 −18.3 10.9
P for linear trend 0.91 0.08

LCD, low-carbohydrate-diet; CAC, coronary artery calcium; CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error; Q, quintile.

*

Adjusted for age, gender, race, educational level, body mass index, physical activity, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, total energy intake, alcohol use, tobacco use, and history of hypertension at baseline