Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Feb 16;16(2):e0247078. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247078

Health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics are associated with Brazilian dietary patterns: Brazilian National Health Survey

Jonas Eduardo Monteiro dos Santos 1,¤,*, Sandra Patricia Crispim 2, Jack Murphy 3, Marianna de Camargo Cancela 1,4
Editor: Michele Drehmer5
PMCID: PMC7886222  PMID: 33592067

Abstract

This study aimed to identify Brazilian dietary patterns and their associations with health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics. Data from the Brazilian National Health Survey conducted in 2013 were used. A questionnaire was applied containing 22 items related to dietary consumption. Dietary patterns were determined through factor analysis (FA). Poisson regression models, with robust variance, were used to identify associations between dietary patterns and independents variables. Statistical significance was defined as p-value<0.05. Data were analysed for 60,202 adults (estimated population size: 146,308,458). FA identified three dietary patterns: healthy, protein, and western. The younger age group (18–24 years) had a lower adherence to the healthy pattern (PR:0.53; 95%CI:0.49–0.58) and greater adherence to the protein (PR:1.52; 95%CI:1.42–1.62) and western (PR:1.80; 95%CI:1.68–1.93) patterns compared to the elderly (≥60 years). Women had a greater association with the healthy pattern (PR:1.32; 95%CI:1.28–1.38) and lower association with the protein pattern (PR:0.80; 95%CI:0.77–0.82) compared to men. Illiterate participants showed lower adherence to the healthy (PR:0.58; 95%CI:0.53–0.63) and western (PR:0.54; 95%CI:0.48–0.62) patterns compared to those with higher educational levels. Smokers had lower adherence to the healthy (PR:0.76; 95%CI:0.71–0.81) and higher adherence to the protein (PR:1.14; 95%CI:1.11–1.19) patterns compared to non-smokers. Participants with poor/very poor self-rated health status had a lower adherence to the healthy (PR:0.79; 95%CI:0.73–0.86) and western (PR:0.81; 95%CI:0.73–0.89) patterns compared to those in a very good/good self-rated health status. Multimorbidity was positively associated with the healthy pattern (PR:1.18; 95%CI:1.11–1.26) and inversely associated with the protein pattern (PR:0.88; 95%CI:0.80–0.96) compared to participants without comorbidities. We suggest that strategies to promote healthy eating should consider health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics in the Brazilian population.

Introduction

Dietary patterns have changed throughout human history. Food industry modernization contributes to continuous and abundant access to energy-dense food rich in lipids, sugar, and additives [1]. On the other hand, fruit, vegetable, and fish production and consumption are dependent on season, region, climate, and food system sophistication [1]. Changes in dietary patterns associated with government initiatives have contributed to reducing disease prevalence related to nutritional deficiencies [1]. However, this has created space for non-communicable diseases (NCDs) [1]. These changes in diet and disease patterns are known as the nutritional and epidemiological transition [1]. In Brazil, NCDs are responsible for 70% of deaths. One third of these deaths occur in people under the age of 60 [2]. Vulnerable people—especially those with lower income and education—are the most affected by NCDs. Social inequality is thus a key factor in the NCD burden [2].

Studies associating dietary patterns, sociodemographic characteristics and lifestyle factors are of particular interest in the nutritional epidemiology field [3]. Most studies consider food intake or nutrient effects in isolation, disregarding the complex interactions between them [3,4]. However, a typical diet is composed of foods combined in meals and snacks with a high degree of interactions between nutritional compounds [4]. Thus, dietary patterns have been proposed as an alternative to fill this methodological gap [3].

Most studies that evaluated dietary patterns have focused on countries in North America, Europe, and Asia [5]. Few Brazilian studies are available, and the ones that are focus on specific areas or specific population groups [614]. Moreover, the most recent studies evaluating national dietary patterns are relatively old, having used data from 2002/2003 [10,15].

Therefore, studies using recent data representing the Brazilian population are needed to monitor the ongoing changes in Brazilian dietary patterns. New evidences will contribute to the development and improvement of public policies aiming to reduce NCDs. This study aims to identify the main Brazilian dietary patterns and associated health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics.

Materials and methods

Design and study population

This cross-sectional study used data from the Brazilian National Health Survey—BNHS (in Portuguese: Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde—PNS), 2013 [16]. BNHS is a five-year household survey with a complex sample design, representative of the Brazilian population in macro-regions, states, urban, rural, and metropolitan areas [17]. The Brazilian Ministry of Health and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) developed and carried out the BNHS. It is the largest national survey conducted to date on Brazilian public health [18]. The sample design used conglomerates in three levels: primary units of sampling (first stage), household (second stage), and selection of the household adult resident (third stage) [19]. Indigenous villages, barracks, military bases, housing camps, boats, penitentiaries, penal colonies, prisons, asylums, orphanages, convents, and hospitals were not included in the sampling design [17].

The questionnaire consisted of three parts: (i) housing and neighbourhood; (ii) household, and (iii) individual head-of-household (applied to a randomly selected resident older than 18) [17]. The National Commission of Ethics in Research for Human Beings approved the survey under number 328.159. All participants gave free and informed written consent [19]. More details about BNHS methods are available in a previous publication [19].

Variables

The following independent variables were selected for analysis: age, sex, colour/race, marital status, education, area of residence, macro-regions, socioeconomic status, physical activity, tobacco use, alcohol intake, self-rated health status and multimorbidity.

Age was categorized into four groups: 18–24 years; 25–39 years; 40–59 years; 60 years and older. Skin colour was self-declared as white, black, east asians, brown or indigenous and then categorised into "white or east asians" and "other". In Brazil, whites and east asians have similar socioeconomic characteristics [20]. Education was categorised as illiterate, elementary school, high school and university.

Socioeconomic status was defined based on availability of household items and the provision of home services and correspondent scores. The method used is described in greater detail in a previous publication [21]. The cut-off criteria for each socioeconomic class were as follows: Class A (45–100 points); B (29–44 points); C (17–28 points); D and E (0–16 points) [21].

Physical activity level included activities practised during leisure time, work, domestic activities, and commuting. This variable was categorised as sufficient (≥ 150 minutes per week), insufficient (>0 and <150 minutes per week), and sedentary (no physical activity) [22].

Tobacco use was categorised into non-smokers, ex-smokers, or smokers, and was based on self-reported consumption. Alcohol intake was categorised as abstainer, moderate, or binge drinker according to the Brazilian Ministry of Health [18,23].

The presence of two or more NCDs in the same person was defined as multimorbidity [24]. The following diseases were considered chronic conditions: systemic arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolaemia, cardiovascular disease, asthma, arthritis or rheumatism, vertebral problems, work-related musculoskeletal disorder, depression, mental illness, lung disease, cancer (all types) and chronic kidney disease. The variable was classified into four categories (none or 1, 2, 3, and 4 conditions or more). Physical and mental health were also self-assessed according to the question: in general, how do you assess your health? Possible answers were very good/good, regular, bad/very bad.

Statistical analysis

The food consumption questionnaire was composed of 22 food items. Factor Analysis (FA) was performed to identify dietary patterns. FA allows the reduction of a large number of variables to a few factors that are not correlated with each other, explaining patterns underlying the original data.

The Bartlett test and Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin (KMO) coefficient were applied to verify the method applicability. KMO≥0.6 was considered acceptable in the partial correlation between diet variables [25,26]. For the Bartlett test, we assumed a Type I error rate of 5% [27,28].

Each dietary pattern was composed of food items with factor loads ≤-0.35 and ≥0.35. The total variances explained by each factor were also considered to determine the number of factors to be retained. Cattell’s scree plots and Eigenvalue >1 were also considered to select the patterns [28]. Orthogonal varimax transformation was applied to facilitate the interpretation of factor results [28]. Internal consistency between diet items and their respective factors was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha test [29]. Participants received a factorial score for each identified pattern. Dietary patterns were categorized into quartiles (Q1-Q4). We assumed the first quartile as the reference quartile and compared it with the others. Thereby, we sought to observe associations with independents variables according by higher or lower adherence to each dietary pattern.

We applied a Poisson regression model with robust variance to estimate the association between dietary patterns, health and sociodemographic characteristics. Robust Poisson regression models allow correction for overestimation of associations when outcomes are not rare (>10% prevalence). Associations were presented as Prevalence Ratios (PR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Taking into account the cross-sectional desing of the study, we considered one as a constant time at risk to estimate the prevalence ratios [30].

The independents variables were age, sex, colour/race, marital status, educational level, area of residence (urban/rural), physical activity, smoking, alcohol intake, self-rated health, multimorbidity and socioeconomic status. Wald tests were used to evaluate the significance of variables in the bivariate analyses; values with p≤0.20 were retained for the multivariate model. Only variables with significant associations (Wald test p<0.05) to the dietary patterns were kept in the final model. All analyses were stratified by Brazilian macro-regions and performed with Stata software, version 14 [31].

Results

Health, sociodemographic and lifestyle characteristics

Data from 60,202 participants were analysed (participation rate 93.6%), representing 146,308,458 Brazilian adults according to the complex sample design.

Table 1 shows the study population characteristics. The average age was 41.3 years (SD: ± 16.6) and 53.0% were women. Thirty four percent of the population attended at least high school and 37.9% primary school only. Approximately 86% of the population lived in urban areas, and 43.8% lived in the southeast region. More than half (54%) reported practicing enough physical activity. The prevalence of non–smokers was 67.8% and smokers 14.7%. The prevalence of binge drinking was 13.6%. Approximately 66% of the sample self-reported very good or good health. Those reporting none or one NCD were 76.4%.

Table 1. Estimated population size (N = 146,308,458), prevalence (% per column), and confidence intervals (95% CI) of helath, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics in Brazilian adults.

Variables N % (95%CI)
Age group (years)    
Mean 41.3
SD 16.6
18–24 23,306,033 16.0 (15.0–16.5)
25–39 46,494,908 31.7 (31.1–32.5)
40–59 50,099,686 34.3 (33.6–35.0)
60+ 26,407,831 18.0 (14.5–18.7)
Gender    
Men 68,916,470 47.0 (46.3–47.9)
Women 77,391,988 53.0 (52.0–53.6)
Skin Colour/Race    
White/East Asian 70,813,082 48.5 (47.6–49.3)
Other a 75,495,376 51.5 (50.8–52.4)
Marital status    
Married 89,537,328 61.2 (60.5–61.2)
Other b 56,771,130 38.8 (38.0–39.5)
Education    
University 26,958,232 19.3 (18.5–20.2)
High School 50,173,018 34.3 (33.6–35.0)
Elementary School 54,004,400 37.9 (37.0–38.7)
Illiterate 11,948,795 8.6 (8.2–9.0)
Area of residence    
Urban 126,132,422 86.2 (85.7–86.6)
Rural 20,176,036 13.8 (13.3–14.2)
Economic status    
A-B 36,633,476 25.0 (24.5–25.6)
C 57,463,271 39.3 (38.6–40.0)
D-E 52,211,711 35.7 (35.1–36.3)
Physical Activity    
Sufficient 78,933,914 54.0 (53.1–54.7)
Insufficient 26,540,646 18.0 (17.5–18.7)
None 40,833,898 28.0 (27.1–28.6)
Smoking    
Never 99,248,243 67.8 (67.1–68.5)
Ex-smokers 25,540,840 17.5 (16.8–18.0)
Current 21,519,375 14.7 (14.2–15.2)
Alcohol intake    
Abstainer 87,183,278 59.6 (58.7–60.4)
Moderate 39,152,545 26.8 (26.0–27.5)
Binge drinker 19,972,635 13.6 (13.1–14.2)
Self-Rated Health    
Very good/Good 96,748,777 66.1 (65.4–66.8)
Fair 41,039,237 28.0 (27.4–28.7)
Poor/Very poor 8,520,444 5.9 (5.5–6.1)
Multimorbidity    
0 or 1 111,769,410 76.4 (75.7–77.0)
2 18,245,024 12.5 (12.0–13.0)
3 8,901,041 6.9 (5.7–6.5)
4+ 7,392,983 5.2 (4.7–5.4)

N, Absolute frequency of estimated population. CI, confidence interval. SD, standard deviation.

a Black(a), brown(a), indigenous.

b single, divorced, separated, widowed.

Factor analysis

Table 2 presents the results of the FA, which identified three main dietary patterns: healthy, protein, and western. Fig 1 shows the scree plot revealed three main dietary patterns with eigenvalues greater than one (see Table 2 for details). The healthy pattern was composed of raw salads, vegetables, cooked vegetables, fruits, and fresh fruit juice. The protein pattern was composed of beans, red meat, fish, and chicken. The western pattern was composed of processed and ultra-processed foods: snacks, pizzas, sweets, and soft drinks. The three main patterns explained 40% of diet variability. The overall KMO was 0.61. The p-value for the Bartlett test was 0.001. The highest p-value for the Cronbach Alpha test was 0.55. Milk was not included in any of the dietary patterns due to a low factorial load.

Table 2. Brazilian dietary patterns components identified by Factor Analysis (FA).

Dietary Patterns Food Items/Food Group Factor Load KMO Eigenvalue Variance (%) a CronbachAlpha test
Healthy Lettuce and tomato salad or other vegetable or raw legumes 0.75 0.60 1.91 15.60 0.55
Cooked vegetables and legumes b 0.73 0.60
Natural fruit juice 0.42 0.63
Fruits 0.59 0.72
Protein Beans 0.54 0.56 1.64 12.80 0.39
Red meat 0.68 0.58
Fish -0.62 0.61
Poultry -0.38 0.52
Western Soft drinks 0.60 0.60 1.26 11.80 0.41
Sweets c 0.65 0.60
Sandwiches, snacks or pizza 0.70 0.59

KMO, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin.

Total variance:40.20. Total KMO: 0.61.

a The variance percentage explained by each pattern.

b cabbage, carrot, chayote, eggplant, pumpkin. Not considered: Potato, cassava, and yams–foods rich in starch.

c cakes, pies, chocolates, candies, biscuits, or sweet biscuits.

Bartlett’s sphericity test p-value<0.001.

Factor loads ≤-0.35 and ≥0.35.

Fig 1. Cattell’s scree plot.

Fig 1

Association of dietary patterns with independents variables

Table 3 shows the associations between the first quartile (Q1—reference quartile) and the last quartile (Q4) of each pattern in the Brazilian population. Associations between the first, second and third quartiles are presented in the supplement as are all results related to the stratified analysis by macro-regions.

Table 3. Associations between health, lifestyle, sociodemographic characteristics and countrywide Brazilian dietary patterns.

Comparison between first and fourth quartiles.

DIETARY PATTERNS HEALTHY PROTEIN WESTERN
Prevalence Ratio Crude (95%CI) Adjusted (95%CI) Crude (95%CI) Adjusted (95%CI) Crude (95%CI) Adjusted (95%CI)
Sample Size (n) 30,101 30,101 30,101
Estimated Population Size (N) 72,190,359 72,135,995 75,207,779
Age groups (years)            
60+ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
18–24 0.59(0.55–0.64) 0.53(0.49–0.58) 1.38(1.30–1.47) 1.52(1.42–1.62) 2.37(2.21–2.54) 1.80(1.68–1.93)
25–39 0.75(0.72–0.79) 0.68(0.64–0.71) 1.33(1.26–1.41) 1.40(1.33–1.48) 1.90(1.77–2.05) 1.49(1.38–1.60)
40–59 0.87(0.83–0.91) 0.81(0.78–0.85) 1.22(1.16–1.29) 1.20(1.14–1.26) 1.34(1.25–1.45) 1.16(1.08–1.24)
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Sex            
Male 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
Female 1.32(1.28–1.38) 1.21(1.17–1.26) 0.73(0.70–0.75) 0.80(0.77–0.82) 1.02(0.98–1.06) -
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.261 -
Skin Color/Race            
White/Yellow 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 1.00
Othera 0.72(0.70–0.75) 0.92(0.89–0.96) 1.00(0.96–1.03) - 0.72(0.69–0.75) 0.90(0.86–0.93)
p-value <0.005 <0.005 0.882 - <0.005 <0.005
Marital status            
Otherb 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
Married 1.10(1.06–1.15) 1.08(1.04–1.12) 1.09(1.06–1.13) 1.08(1.05–1.12) 0.86(0.83–0.89) -
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 -
Education            
College 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
High School 0.78(0.75–0.82) 0.90(0.86–0.94) 1.37(1.29–1.45) 1.34(1.27–1.42) 0.88(0.85–0.91) 0.92(0.89–0.96)
Elementary School 0.69(0.65–0.72) 0.76(0.72–0.79) 1.46(1.38–1.55) 1.54(1.46–1.64) 0.54(0.52–0.57) 0.73(0.69–0.76)
Illiterate 0.49(0.44–0.54) 0.58(0.53–0.63) 1.20(1.11–1.30) 1.60(1.47–1.73) 0.30(0.27–0.34) 0.54(0.48–0.61)
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Area of residence            
Urban area 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rural area 0.60(0.56–0.65) 0.83(0.78–0.89) 1.10(1.05–1.15) 1.17(1.12–1.22) 0.47(0.43–0.52) 0.64(0.59–0.69)
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Economic Status            
A-B 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 -
C 0.84(0.80–0.88) 1.01(0.96–1.05) 1.04(1.00–1.09) - 0.82(0.78–0.85) -
D-E 0.67(0.64–0.70) 0.92(0.88–0.97) 0.98(0.93–1.02) - 0.66(0.63–0.70) -
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 -
Physical Activity            
Sufficient 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 -
Insufficient 0.89(0.84–0.94) 0.86(0.82–0.90) 1.01(0.97–1.06) - 0.95(0.91–1.00) -
None 0.86(0.82–0.90) 0.83(0.80–0.87) 0.99(0.95–1.03) - 0.86(0.82–0.90) -
p-value <0.005 <0.005 0.598 - <0.005 -
Smoking            
Never 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
Ex-smoker 0.92(0.88–0.97) 0.91(0.87–0.96) 1.05(1.01–1.10) 1.04(1.00–1.09) 0.77(0.73–0.81) -
Current 0.66(0.62–0.71) 0.76(0.71–0.81) 1.28(1.24–1.33) 1.15(1.11–1.19) 0.86(0.82–0.91) -
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 -
Alcohol intake            
Abstainer 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Moderate 0.96(0.92–1.00) 0.95(0.92–0.99) 1.13(1.09–1.18) 1.02(0.98–1.06) 1.31(1.26–1.36) 1.09(1.06–1.14)
Binge drinker 0.72(0.67–0.77) 0.84(0.79–0.90) 1.29(1.24–1.34) 1.09(1.05–1.14) 1.31(1.25–1.38) 1.10(1.06–1.15)
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Self-Rated Health            
Very good/Good 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 1.00
Fair 0.85(0.81–0.89) 0.87(0.84–0.91) 0.92(0.88–0.95) - 0.66(0.63–0.69) 0.90(0.86–0.95)
Poor/Very poor 0.74(0.67–0.80) 0.79(0.73–0.86) 0.86(0.80–0.93) - 0.48(0.43–0.54) 0.81(0.73–0.89)
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005
Multimorbidity            
0 or 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -
2 1.15(1.08–1.21) 1.03(0.98–1.08) 0.83(0.77–0.90) 0.96(0.91–1.01) 0.79(0.75–0.84) -
3 1.31(1.24–1.39) 1.13(1.07–1.20) 0.77(0.71–0.85) 0.93(0.87–1.00) 0.72(0.66–0.79) -
4+ 1.34(1.27–1.41) 1.18(1.11–1.26) 0.77(0.71–0.85) 0.88(0.80–0.96) 0.65(0.59–0.73) -
p-value <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.012 <0.005 -

Wald Test: Variables not statistically significant in the model.

a Black(a), brown(a), indigenous.

b single, divorced, separated, widowed.

Nationally, adherence to the healthy pattern was less common among those aged 18–24 (PR: 0.53; 95%CI: 0.49–0.58) than among those 60 and older. Associations between age and healthy pattern were similar in all Brazilian macro-regions. A dose-response relationship between age and healthy pattern was observed in all Brazilian macro-regions and at the national level. The healthy pattern was significantly more common among women compared to men in all regions and in Brazil as a whole.

The healthy pattern was significantly less frequent among illiterate participants compared to those with a university education in Brazil as a whole and all macro-regions. Likewise, the healthy pattern was significantly more common among urban residents than rural residents in the North (PR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.37–0.66) and Northeast (PR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.61–0.83) macro-regions. On the other hand, rural inhabitants of the South region were more likely to adopt the healthy pattern (PR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.04–1.27) than those living in urban areas in the same region (Supplement material).

Women were more likely to adopt the healthy pattern than men (PR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.17–1.26). Adherence to the healthy pattern was more common among married than unmarried individuals. Adherence to the healthy pattern was less common among current smokers, binge drinkers, and those with self-rated health as poor/very poor compared to non-smokers, abstainers and people with very good/good self-rated health, respectively. Individuals with four or more NCD’s were more likely to adopt the healthy pattern than those with none or one NCD.

Younger participants (18–24 years) were more likely to adopt the protein pattern (PR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.42–1.62) than the elderly (≥60 years), with significant associations nationally and in all Brazilian macro-regions. In addition, women were significantly less likely to adopt the protein pattern than men. Married individuals were more likely to adopt the protein pattern than their unmarried counterparts. The protein pattern was more common among illiterate participants (RP: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.47–1.73) compared to those with a university degree. Current smokers and binge drinkers were more likely to adopt the protein pattern than non-smokers and abstainers. The adherence to the protein pattern was less common among those with four or more NCDs compared to those with none or one NCD. Nationally, associations between skin color, economic status, physical activity, self-rated health and the protein pattern were not significant.

Younger participants also showed higher adherence to the western pattern (PR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.68–1.93) compared to the elderly. Adherence to the western pattern was less frequent among black, brown and indigenous participants compared to white and East Asian participants together. Overall, the western pattern was significantly less common among illiterate participants (PR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.48–0.61) compared to those holding a university degree. In the North, rural residence was inversely associated with the western pattern compared to those living in the urban area (PR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.21–0.40). Rural dwellers in other macro-regions also presented a weaker association with the western pattern compared to urban area residents (Supplementary Information). The western pattern was more frequent among binge drinkers than abstainers (PR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.06–1.15). On the other hand, the western pattern was less common among those with poor/very poor self-rated health compared to those with very good/good self-rated health. Nationally, associations between sex, marital status, economic status, physical activity, smokers, multimorbidity and the western pattern were not statistically significant.

Discussion

Our study identified three main dietary patterns–healthy, protein and western–which explained 40% of the diet variability. Adherence to the healthy pattern was less common among younger participants (18–24 years old), black, brown and indigenous participants, illiterate people, people living in rural areas, physically inactive individuals, current smokers, binge drinkers and those with lower socioeconomic status and self-rated poor/very poor health. The protein pattern was more common among people who were younger, married, male, illiterate, living in rural areas, current smokers, binge drinkers and those with none or one NCD. Finally, the western pattern was more likely to be adopted by younger individuals, binge drinkers, those holding a university degree and those living in urban areas. To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyse dietary patterns using a nationally representative sample of Brazilian population.

The healthy pattern presented high factor loads for the healthy eating markers. Our findings corroborate previous studies that found similar dietary patterns [32], with high factor loads for vegetables, fruits and fresh fruit juice, poultry, low-fat cheeses, roots, tubers and fish [8,9,12,15]. The healthy pattern has also been described in other studies as vegetables [33] or prudent [9,3444], with similar composition.

Previous studies evaluating dietary patterns in Brazilian subpopulations also identified the western pattern. High factor loads were observed for foods such as butter, margarine, added sugar, bread, pasta, fats, dairy products, sauces, pizza, processed meat, soft drinks, canned vegetables, sweets and desserts [9,13,14]. The western pattern is also described as unhealthy [34,3638,40,41,4351] or modern [36], presenting a high factor load for red and processed meat, eggs, refined grains, cookies, snacks, pizza, French fries and hamburgers.

Healthy and western patterns have been verified in many dietaries patterns studies and describe the extremes of a group diet. Between these patterns are intermediate dietaries patterns which characterize the differences in eating habits in different groups. Our study identified the protein pattern as the intermediate pattern. Intermediate patterns have been described in previous literature as mixed pattern presenting a high factor load for cereals, eggs, soft drinks, coffee, juice, fruit, vegetables, nuts, dairy products, butter, margarine, meat, fish, shrimp, sweets and alcohol [6]. The snacks pattern is composed of butter, cheese, meat, pork, beef, processed meats, sandwiches, eggs, dairy products, sweets, and desserts. Finally, the dual pattern [8,9,52] consists of a high factor load of dairy products, fresh fruit, tomato, vegetables, juice, fruits, green vegetables, bananas, sweets, desserts, soft drinks, processed meats, fast food, margarine, and cookies [10]. The traditional Brazilian pattern is an intermediate pattern [615,25,5257] characterised by rice and beans consumption [15]. This pattern was not identified in this study because the BNHS did not evaluate rice consumption. The BNHS considered only healthy eating markers, and the rice consumption assessment was not prioritized, even though beans are usually consumed with rice in Brazil. Other intermediate country-specific patterns described in the literature are traditional Polish [42], Kimchi rice [58], Vegetarian [59], Tex–Mex [48,49], Dim Sum [60], Mediterranean [38,45], and Mchicha [61] patterns.

Sociodemographic characteristics and dietary patterns

Previous studies identified associations between dietary patterns, educational level, and income in the Brazilian population [15]. However, other sociodemographic characteristics were not considered [62]. We found that age, sex, educational level, skin colour, marital status and socioeconomic status were associated with dietary patterns.

We observed dose-response effects in the associations between age groups and dietary patterns. These dose-response effects suggest age is an important factor in food choice. Previous studies have shown that the elderly prefer healthy diets [6366]. On the other hand, younger people prefer soft drinks and fast food [4,65,67,68]. Several factors could explain healthier eating habits in older individuals. They have more time to prepare their meals and more knowledge about healthy eating habits than young people. Moreover, they are generally more concerned about diet as part of NCD prevention and control. The high NCD prevalence observed among the elderly leads them to adopt a healthier lifestyle, including diet improvement [69,70]. Adequate diet practices require knowledge, planning time for groceries, and cooking. For young people, these aspects can be considered barriers to adopting healthy eating habits. Therefore, they tend to choose more pragmatic alternatives: eating away from home, usually high-energy density foods [15]. A study of 34,000 Brazilians reported that about 40% of participants consumed food outside home. Beetwen teenagers, fifty-one percent reported consumed food outside home. The most frequently consumed food group was the high-energy content and low nutritional quality one: alcoholic beverages, fried foods, pizza, soft drinks, and sandwiches [71]. Lack of time to prepare food, lack of access to healthy food in schools and universities, financial instability, poor culinary skills, little knowledge about food preparation, lack of cooking equipment, and easy access to processed products were indicated as the main reasons for eating unhealthily [72]. In this scenario, the provision of healthy food in school and university environments could be a strategy to promote healthy eating habits among young people.

Women presented higher adherence to the healthy pattern compared to men in all Brazilian macro-regions (S1S5 Tables). On the other hand, women’s adherence to the protein pattern was lower compared to men. Only in the Southeast of the country, the western pattern was more common among women compared to men (S1 Table). Culturally, women are more concerned about health and body shape, which also reflects on food choices. Our findings corroborate previous studies where women showed greater adherence to healthy patterns compared to men [4,63,64,68].

In the Southeast and the Northeast, married people had higher adherence to the healthy pattern compared to unmarried people (S1 and S4 Tables in Suplementary Information). We verified higher adhesion to the protein pattern in married people living in Southeast, South, Midwest, and North compared to unmarried people (S1, S2, S3 and S5 Tables in Suplementary Information). Previous findings have pointed to inconsistent associations between marital status and dietary patterns [65,73]. However, married life seems to have a positive effect on changing eating habits over time [73]. A study conducted in an urban population in Lithuania revealed that married individuals were more likely to follow a diet rich in fresh and cooked vegetables, fruits, eggs, tomatoes, and meats than single individuals [66]. Married individuals tend to prepare and consume healthier foods, while single individuals tend to choose fast food options.

People with black/brown skin colour and indigenous identify lower adherence to the healthy and western patterns. On the other hand, greater adherence to the protein pattern was seen among black, brown, and indigenous participants from the Southeast and South compared to whites and East Asians (S1 and S2 Tables). Previous studies reported differences in dietary patterns between different ethnic groups [64,74]. Ethnicity is related to social inequities and income distribution in Brazil and other developing countries. Indigenous and black/and brown people generally have less access to regular education, and have lower incomes [7577]. These factors also affect their food choices. A study in the United States found that, among white people, educational level was strongly associated with healthier patterns; however, this association was weak among black people [78].

Adherence to the healthy and western patterns was less common among the lower education group. Associations were stronger between the protein pattern and low education groups. Dietary patterns may differ between educational levels [65,66] because people with higher education tend to adopt healthier eating habits [66,68,79,80]. Our results differ, in part, from previous findings: healthy and western patterns were more common among those with higher educational levels. In this study, educational level was used as a proxy for income. People with higher educational levels tend to have higher purchasing power, which may be associated with healthier food choices. Furthermore, people with higher education are more able to understand the importance of healthy eating habits [65].

Adherence to the healthy pattern was less frequent among people with lower economic status; this group was more likely to adopt the protein and western patterns when compared to those with a higher economic status. Foods rich in saturated fat and sugar are cheaper than healthy and organic foods [15,65,66,74]. The adherence to the protein pattern among those with lower socioeconomic status could be explained by some factors: (i) among foods with high factor load in this pattern, beans are the protein source most affordable in Brazil; (ii) beans are part of a typical Brazilian meal consumed by every social classes; (iii) indigenous people cultivate and consume different species of beans in the North and Northeast regions of Brazil; (iv) the cultural high consumption of barbecue in the Midwest and South regions of Brazil; (v) fishing is common among indigenous people.

Health, lifestyle characteristics and dietary patterns

Our study also identified statistically significant associations between the three dietary patterns, health and lifestyle characteristics in the Brazilian population. People with healthy eating habits tend to adopt a healthy lifestyle. Adherence to the healthy pattern was more common among physically active individuals, abstainers and non-smokers. Many researchers have shown that people who practice regular physical activity and do not smoke are more likely to consume fruits, fishes, vegetables, legumes and less red and processed meats [67,8083].

On the other hand, binge drinkers and smokers were more likely to adopt the protein and western patterns. The consumption of alcoholic beverages can modulate appetite and food choices [84]. The diet among alcohol consumers tends to be lower in carbohydrates, fiber, vitamins, minerals, fruits, vegetables and dairy products [8486] and high in animal products, oils, fatty acids, bread and breakfast cereals [85]. The consumption of unhealthy food is also frequent among smokers. Nicotine can modify smokers’ sense of taste. With that, they prefer foods high in sugar and fat and processed food become more palatable [4,68,80,87].

Adherence to the healthy pattern was less frequent among individuals who reported poor/very poor self-rated heath, which corroborates a previous study [66]. Adherence to the western pattern was more frequent among those with very good/good self-rated health status in the Southeast and Midwest regions. These contradictory findings could be explained by some factors: (i) people with very good/good self-rated health are less concerned about healthy eating habits; (ii) people with NCDs tend to adopt healthier eating habits. Nationally, people with four or more NCDs were more likely to adopt the healthy pattern. Otherwise, the protein pattern was less frequent among those with four or more NCDs. We highlight as a limitation that our study is a cross-sectional study design in which reverse causality may be present. In addition, self-rated health status is a subjective variable.

We highlight as a strength of this study the fact that the BNHS is the most comprehensive, and representative health survey conducted in Brazil. Our study was able to perform dietary patterns analysis with a representative sample of the Brazilian population. In addition, we applied robust statistical methods to explore the relationship between the main dietary patterns, health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics. Most previous Brazilian studies that derived dietary patterns only used samples from large urban centres [69,11,52,88]. This survey provided us with data from rural areas and other small towns, which enriched our findings. Lastly, FA evaluates the diet globally, considering all aspects of diet complexity.

Our study has some limitations. First, the available data in BNHS may not have captured all dietary patterns of the studied population [5]. This limitation is inherent to the instrument applied to collect food consumption data: BNHS applied a screen questionnaire of diet with only 22 food items that did not capture all foods consumed in Brazil. Second, associations between dietary patterns and independents variables presented in this study should be interpreted with caution. FA is not a mutually exclusive technique, and the same individual may have a high factor load for more than one pattern.

We identified three main dietary patterns in the Brazilian population: healthy, protein and western. We concluded that people with a healthy lifestyle were more likely to adopt healthy pattern. On the other hand, the western pattern was more common among those with an unhealthy lifestyle—smokers, binge drinkers and the physically inactive. Based on our findings, we suggest that strategies to promote healthy eating habits should consider these aspects related to health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Southeast Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S2 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the South Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S3 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Midwest Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S4 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S5 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the North Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S6 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S7 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Southeast Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S8 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the South Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S9 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Midwest Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S10 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S11 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the North Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S12 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S13 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Southeast Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S14 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the South Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S15 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Midwest Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S16 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

S17 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the North Region of Brazil.

Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

(PDF)

Data Availability

The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/saude/9160-pesquisa-nacional-de-saude.html?=&t=o-que-e.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.WCRF—World Cancer Research Fund | American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global Perspective. 2007;537 Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Brasil. Plano de Ações Estratégicas para o Enfrentamento das Doenças Crônicas Não Transmissíveis (DCNT). Minist. Saúde. 2011. Avaliable from: http://portalms.saude.gov.br/vigilancia-em-saude/vigilancia-de-doencas-cronicas-nao-transmissiveis-dcnt/plano-de-acoes-estrategicas-para-o-enfrentamento-das-doencas-cronicas-nao-transmissiveis-dcnt. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 3.Hu FB. Dietary pattern analysis: a new direction in nutritional epidemiology. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2002. February;13(1):3–9. 10.1097/00041433-200202000-00002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Beck KL, Jones B, Ullah I, McNaughton SA, Haslett SJ, Stonehouse W. Associations between dietary patterns, socio-demographic factors and anthropometric measurements in adult New Zealanders: an analysis of data from the 2008/09 New Zealand Adult Nutrition Survey. Eur J Nutr. 2018. June 1;57(4):1421–33. 10.1007/s00394-017-1421-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Grosso G, Bella F, Godos J, Sciacca S, Del Rio D, Ray S, et al. Possible role of diet in cancer: systematic review and multiple meta-analyses of dietary patterns, lifestyle factors, and cancer risk. Nutr Rev. 2017. June 1;75(6):405–19. 10.1093/nutrit/nux012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Sichieri R. Dietary Patterns and Their Associations with Obesity in the Brazilian City of Rio de Janeiro. Obes Res. 2002. January 1;10(1):42–8. 10.1038/oby.2002.6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Sichieri R, Castro JFG, Moura AS. Fatores associados ao padrão de consumo alimentar da população brasileira urbana. Cad Saúde Pública. 2003;19:S47–53. 10.1590/s0102-311x2003000700006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Marchioni DML, Fisberg RM, Filho G, De JF, Kowalski LP, Carvalho MB de, et al. Dietary patterns and risk of oral cancer: a case-control study in São Paulo, Brazil. Rev Saúde Pública. 2007. February;41(1):19–26. 10.1590/s0034-89102007000100004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Toledo ALA de Koifman RJ, Koifman S Marchioni DML. Dietary patterns and risk of oral and pharyngeal cancer: a case-control study in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública. 2010. January;26(1):135–42. 10.1590/s0102-311x2010000100014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Marchioni DM, Claro RM, Levy RB, Monteiro CA. Patterns of food acquisition in Brazilian households and associated factors: a population-based survey. Public Health Nutr. 2011. September;14(9):1586–92. 10.1017/S1368980011000486 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Vilela AAF, Sichieri R, Pereira RA, Cunha DB, Rodrigues PRM, Gonçalves-Silva RMV, et al. Dietary patterns associated with anthropometric indicators of abdominal fat in adults. Cad Saúde Pública. 2014. March;30(3):502–10. 10.1590/0102-311x00167512 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Santos R de O, Fisberg RM, Marchioni DM, Baltar VT. Dietary patterns for meals of Brazilian adults. Br J Nutr. 2015. September;114(5):822–8. 10.1017/S0007114515002445 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Borges CA, Marchioni DML, Levy RB, Slater B. Dietary patterns associated with overweight among Brazilian adolescents. Appetite. 2018. April 1;123:402–9. 10.1016/j.appet.2018.01.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Cunha DB, Bezerra IN, Pereira RA, Sichieri R. At-home and away-from-home dietary patterns and BMI z-scores in Brazilian adolescents. Appetite. 2018. January;120:374–80. 10.1016/j.appet.2017.09.028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Nascimento S, Barbosa FS, Sichieri R, Pereira RA. Dietary availability patterns of the brazilian macro-regions. Nutr J. 2011. July 28;10:79 10.1186/1475-2891-10-79 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Brasil. Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde. In: Inst. Bras. Geogr. E Estat [Internet]. 2013. Available from: https://www.pns.icict.fiocruz.br/index.php?pag=proposicao.
  • 17.Souza-Júnior PRB de, Freitas MPS de, Antonaci G de A, Szwarcwald CL. Desenho da amostra da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde 2013. Epidemiol E Serviços Saúde. 2015. June;24(2):207–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Garcia LP, Freitas LRS de. Consumo abusivo de álcool no Brasil: resultados da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde 2013. Epidemiol E Serviços Saúde. 2015. June;24(2):227–37. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Jaime PC, Stopa SR, Oliveira TP, Vieira ML, Szwarcwald CL, Malta DC. Prevalência e distribuição sociodemográfica de marcadores de alimentação saudável, Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde, Brasil 2013. Epidemiol E Serviços Saúde. 2015. June;24(2):267–76. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Brasil. (DIEESE). In: Departamento Intersindical de Estatística e Estudos Socioeconômmicos [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2019 Jan 21]. Available from: https://www.dieese.org.br/.
  • 21.Pilli L, Ambrósio B, Suzzara B, Alves M, Reis M, Yamakava P, et al. Critério de Classificação Econômica Brasil [Internet]. Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Pesquisa. 2015. [cited 2018 Feb 21]. Available from: http://www.abep.org/criterio-brasil. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.WHO. Physical Activity and Adults [Internet]. World Health Organization. 2019 [cited 2018 Feb 19]. Available from: https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_adults/en/.
  • 23.Brasil. I Levantamento Nacional sobre os Padrões de Consumo de Álcool na População Brasileira [Internet]. Centro de Informações Sobre Saúde e Álcool. 2007 [cited 2019 Jan 7]. Available from: http://www.cisa.org.br/artigo/155/i-levantamento-nacional-sobre-os-padroes.php.
  • 24.Carvalho JN de, Roncalli ÂG, Cancela M de C, Souza DLB de. Prevalence of multimorbidity in the Brazilian adult population according to socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. PLOS ONE. 2017. April 6;12(4):e0174322 10.1371/journal.pone.0174322 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Previdelli ÁN, de Andrade SC, Fisberg RM, Marchioni DM. Using two different approaches to assess dietary patterns: hypothesis-driven and data-driven analysis. nutrients [Internet]. 2016. September 23 [cited 2018 Aug 15];8(10). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5083981/. 10.3390/nu8100593 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Santos IKS dos, Conde WL. Tendência de padrões alimentares entre adultos das capitais brasileiras. Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2020;23:e200035 10.1590/1980-549720200035 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Box GEP. A general distribution theory for a class of likelihood criteria. Biometrika. 1949. December 1;36(3–4):317–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974. March 1;39(1):31–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951. September 1;16(3):297–334. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003. October 20;3(1):21 10.1186/1471-2288-3-21 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Stata: Software for Statistics and Data Science [Internet]. [cited 2020 Apr 28]. Available from: https://www.stata.com/.
  • 32.Ax E, Lemming EW, Becker W, Andersson A, Lindroos AK, Cederholm T, et al. Dietary patterns in Swedish adults; results from a national dietary survey. Br J Nutr. 2016. January;115(1):95–104. 10.1017/S0007114515004110 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Baglietto L, Krishnan K, Severi G, Hodge A, Brinkman M, English DR, et al. Dietary patterns and risk of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2011. February;104(3):524–31. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6606044 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Agurs-Collins T, Rosenberg L, Makambi K, Palmer JR, Adams-Campbell L. Dietary patterns and breast cancer risk in women participating in the Black Women’s Health Study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009. September 1;90(3):621–8. 10.3945/ajcn.2009.27666 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kurotani K, Budhathoki S, Joshi AM, Yin G, Toyomura K, Kono S, et al. Dietary patterns and colorectal cancer in a Japanese population: The Fukuoka Colorectal Cancer Study. Br J Nutr. 2010. December;104(11):1703–11. 10.1017/S0007114510002606 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Helen‐Ng LC, Razak IA, Ghani WMN, Marhazlinda J, Norain AT, Jallaludin R-LR, et al. Dietary pattern and oral cancer risk–a factor analysis study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012;40(6):560–6. 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2012.00704.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Chan JM, Gong Z, Holly EA, Bracci PM. Dietary patterns and risk of pancreatic cancer in a large population-based case-control study in the San Francisco Bay Area. Nutr Cancer. 2013;65(1):157–64. 10.1080/01635581.2012.725502 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Castelló A, Pollán M, Buijsse B, Ruiz A, Casas AM, Baena-Cañada JM, et al. Spanish Mediterranean diet and other dietary patterns and breast cancer risk: case–control EpiGEICAM study. Br J Cancer. 2014. September;111(7):1454–62. 10.1038/bjc.2014.434 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Tumas N, Niclis C, Aballay LR, Osella AR, Díaz M del P. Traditional dietary pattern of South America is linked to breast cancer: an ongoing case–control study in Argentina. Eur J Nutr. 2014. March 1;53(2):557–66. 10.1007/s00394-013-0564-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Park Y, Lee J, Oh JH, Shin A, Kim J. Dietary patterns and colorectal cancer risk in a Korean population. Medicine (Baltimore) [Internet]. 2016. June 24 [cited 2018 Jul 3];95(25). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4998300/. 10.1200/JCO.2015.66.1181 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Shin S, Saito E, Inoue M, Sawada N, Ishihara J, Takachi R, et al. Dietary pattern and breast cancer risk in Japanese women: the Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study (JPHC Study). Br J Nutr. 2016. May;115(10):1769–79. 10.1017/S0007114516000684 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Krusińska B, Hawrysz I, Słowińska MA, Wądołowska L, Biernacki M, Czerwińska A, et al. Dietary patterns and breast or lung cancer risk: A pooled analysis of 2 case-control studies in north-eastern Poland. Adv Clin Exp Med Off Organ Wroclaw Med Univ. 2017. December;26(9):1367–75. 10.17219/acem/65433 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mehta RS, Song M, Nishihara R, Drew DA, Wu K, Qian ZR, et al. Dietary Patterns and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: Analysis by Tumor Location and Molecular Subtypes. Gastroenterology. 2017. June 1;152(8):1944–1953.e1. 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.02.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Mehta RS, Nishihara R, Cao Y, Song M, Mima K, Qian ZR, et al. Association of Dietary Patterns With Risk of Colorectal Cancer Subtypes Classified by Fusobacterium nucleatum in Tumor Tissue. JAMA Oncol. 2017. July 1;3(7):921–7. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.6374 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Cottet V, Touvier M, Fournier A, Touillaud MS, Lafay L, Clavel-Chapelon F, et al. Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Risk and Dietary Patterns in the E3N-EPIC Prospective Cohort Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2009. November 15;170(10):1257–67. 10.1093/aje/kwp257 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Buck K, Vrieling A, Flesch-Janys D, Chang-Claude J. Dietary patterns and the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in a German case–control study. Cancer Causes Control. 2011. February 1;22(2):273–82. 10.1007/s10552-010-9695-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Safari A, Shariff ZM, Kandiah M, Rashidkhani B, Fereidooni F. Dietary patterns and risk of colorectal cancer in Tehran Province: a case–control study. BMC Public Health. 2013. March 12;13:222 10.1186/1471-2458-13-222 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Melkonian SC, Daniel CR, Hildebrandt MAT, Tannir NM, Ye Y, Chow W-H, et al. Joint Association of Genome-Wide Association Study–Identified Susceptibility Loci and Dietary Patterns in Risk of Renal Cell Carcinoma Among Non-Hispanic Whites. Am J Epidemiol. 2014. September 1;180(5):499–507. 10.1093/aje/kwu158 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Tu H, Heymach JV, Wen C-P, Ye Y, Pierzynski JA, Roth JA, et al. Different dietary patterns and reduction of lung cancer risk: A large case-control study in the U.S. Sci Rep. 2016. 27;6:26760 10.1038/srep26760 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Van Ryswyk K, Villeneuve PJ, Johnson KC, Epidemiology Research Group TCCR. Dietary patterns and the risk of female breast cancer among participants of the Canadian National Enhanced Cancer Surveillance System. Can J Public Health Rev Can Sante Publique. 2016. 27;107(1):e49–55. 10.17269/cjph.107.5230 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Tayyem RF, Bawadi HA, Shehadah I, Agraib LM, AbuMweis SS, Al-Jaberi T, et al. Dietary patterns and colorectal cancer. Clin Nutr. 2017. June 1;36(3):848–52. 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.04.029 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Marchioni DML, Latorre M do RD de O, Eluf-Neto J, Wünsch-Filho V, Fisberg RM. Identification of dietary patterns using factor analysis in an epidemiological study in São Paulo. Sao Paulo Med J. 2005. May;123(3):124–7. 10.1590/s1516-31802005000300007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Cunha DB, Almeida RMVR de, Sichieri R, Pereira RA. Association of dietary patterns with BMI and waist circumference in a low-income neighbourhood in Brazil. Br J Nutr. 2010. September;104(6):908–13. 10.1017/S0007114510001479 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Cunha DB, Sichieri R, Almeida RMVR de, Pereira RA. Factors associated with dietary patterns among low-income adults. Public Health Nutr. 2011. September;14(9):1579–85. 10.1017/S136898001000354X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Trindade de Castro MB. Un Patrón Dietético Mixto Se Asocia Con Un Menor Declive En El Cambio. Nutr Hosp. 2014. March 1;(3):519–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Massarani FA, Cunha DB, Muraro AP, Souza B da SN de, Sichieri R, Yokoo EM. Agregação familiar e padrões alimentares na população brasileira. Cad Saúde Pública. 2015. December;31(12):2535–45. 10.1590/0102-311X00090314 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Castro MBT de, Vilela AAF, Oliveira ASD de, Cabral M, Souza RAG de, Kac G, et al. Sociodemographic characteristics determine dietary pattern adherence during pregnancy. Public Health Nutr. 2016. May;19(7):1245–51. 10.1017/S1368980015002700 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Wie G-A, Cho Y-A, Kang H -h, Ryu KA, Yoo M-K, Kim J, et al. Identification of major dietary patterns in Korean adults and their association with cancer risk in the Cancer Screening Examination Cohort. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017. October;71(10):1223–9. 10.1038/ejcn.2017.6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Liu X, Wang X, Lin S, Lao X, Zhao J, Song Q, et al. Dietary patterns and the risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based case–control study in a rural population. Clin Nutr. 2017. February 1;36(1):260–6. 10.1016/j.clnu.2015.11.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Butler LM, Wu AH, Wang R, Koh W-P, Yuan J-M, Yu MC. A vegetable-fruit-soy dietary pattern protects against breast cancer among postmenopausal Singapore Chinese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010. April 1;91(4):1013–9. 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28572 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Jordan I, Hebestreit A, Swai B, Krawinkel MB. Dietary patterns and breast cancer risk among women in northern Tanzania: a case–control study. Eur J Nutr. 2013. April 1;52(3):905–15. 10.1007/s00394-012-0398-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Levy-Costa RB, Sichieri R, Pontes N dos S, Monteiro CA. Household food availability in Brazil: distribution and trends (1974–2003). Rev Saúde Pública. 2005. August;39(4):530–40. 10.1590/s0034-89102005000400003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Kearney M, Kearney JM, Dunne A, Gibney MJ. Sociodemographic determinants of perceived influences on food choice in a nationally representative sample of Irish adults. Public Health Nutr. 2000. June;3(2):219–26. 10.1017/s1368980000000252 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Park S-Y, Murphy SP, Wilkens LR, Yamamoto JF, Sharma S, Hankin JH, et al. Dietary Patterns Using the Food Guide Pyramid Groups Are Associated with Sociodemographic and Lifestyle Factors: The Multiethnic Cohort Study. J Nutr. 2005. April 1;135(4):843–9. 10.1093/jn/135.4.843 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Kriaucioniene V, Petkeviciene J, Klumbiene J. Dietary patterns and their association with sociodemographic factors in Lithuanian adult population. Med Kaunas Lith. 2008;44(10):799–804. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Luksiene DI, Baceviciene M, Tamosiunas A, Daugeliene E, Kranciukaite D. Health, alcohol and psychosocial factors in Eastern Europe study: dietary patterns and their association with socio-demographic factors in the Lithuanian urban population of Kaunas city. Int J Public Health. 2011. April;56(2):209–16. 10.1007/s00038-010-0170-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Sánchez-Villegas A, Delgado-Rodríguez M, Martínez-González MÁ, de Irala-Estévez J. Gender, age, socio-demographic and lifestyle factors associated with major dietary patterns in the Spanish Project SUN (Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra). Eur J Clin Nutr. 2003. February;57(2):285–92. 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601528 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Knudsen VK, Matthiessen J, Biltoft-Jensen A, Sørensen MR, Groth MV, Trolle E, et al. Identifying dietary patterns and associated health-related lifestyle factors in the adult Danish population. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2014. June;68(6):736–40. 10.1038/ejcn.2014.38 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Pala V, Sieri S, Masala G, Palli D, Panico S, Vineis P, et al. Associations between dietary pattern and lifestyle, anthropometry and other health indicators in the elderly participants of the EPIC-Italy cohort. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2006. April 1;16(3):186–201. 10.1016/j.numecd.2005.05.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Mohd Shahrin FI, Omar N, Mat Daud Z‘Azuan, Zakaria NF. Factors associated with food choices among elderly: a scoping review. Malays J Nutr. 2019. November 22;25(2):185–98. [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Bezerra IN, Souza A de M, Pereira RA, Sichieri R. Consumo de alimentos fora do domicílio no Brasil. Rev Saúde Pública. 2013. February;47:200s–11s. 10.1590/s0034-89102013000700006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Bernardo GL, Jomori MM, Fernandes AC, Proença RP da C. Food intake of university students. Rev Nutr. 2017. December;30(6):847–65. 10.1186/s12937-017-0305-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Thorpe MG, Milte CM, Crawford D, McNaughton SA. A comparison of the dietary patterns derived by principal component analysis and cluster analysis in older Australians. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2016. February 29;13(1):30 10.1186/s12966-016-0353-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Kerver JM, Yang EJ, Bianchi L, Song WO. Dietary patterns associated with risk factors for cardiovascular disease in healthy US adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003. December 1;78(6):1103–10. 10.1093/ajcn/78.6.1103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Ferreira JP, Leeson G, Melhado VR, Ferreira JP, Leeson G, Melhado VR. Cartographies of aging in the rural context: race/ethnicity, gender, schooling and social class. Trab Educ E Saúde. 2019;17(1):e0017612. [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Goes EF, Ramos D de O, Ferreira AJF. Racial health inequalities and the COVID-19 pandemic. Trab Educ E Saúde. 2020. May 28;18(3):e00278110. [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Olinto MTA, Olinto BA. Raça e desigualdade entre as mulheres: um exemplo no sul do Brasil. Cad Saúde Pública. 2000. December;16(4):1137–42. 10.1590/s0102-311x2000000400033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Kell KP, Judd SE, Pearson KE, Shikany JM, Fernández JR. Associations between socio-economic status and dietary patterns in US black and white adults. Br J Nutr. 2015. June 14;113(11):1792–9. 10.1017/S0007114515000938 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Irala-Estévez JD, Groth M, Johansson L, Oltersdorf U, Prättälä R, Martínez-González MA. A systematic review of socio-economic differences in food habits in Europe: consumption of fruit and vegetables. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2000. September;54(9):706–14. 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601080 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Mishra GD, McNaughton SA, Ball K, Brown WJ, Giles GG, Dobson AJ. Major dietary patterns of young and middle aged women: results from a prospective Australian cohort study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010. October;64(10):1125–33. 10.1038/ejcn.2010.121 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Engeset D, Alsaker E, Ciampi A, Lund E. Dietary patterns and lifestyle factors in the Norwegian EPIC cohort: The Norwegian Women and Cancer (NOWAC) study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005. May;59(5):675–84. 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602129 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Oppert J-M, Thomas F, Charles M-A, Benetos A, Basdevant A, Simon C. Leisure-time and occupational physical activity in relation to cardiovascular risk factors and eating habits in French adults. Public Health Nutr. 2006. September;9(6):746–54. 10.1079/phn2005882 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Charreire H, Kesse-Guyot E, Bertrais S, Simon C, Chaix B, Weber C, et al. Associations between dietary patterns, physical activity (leisure-time and occupational) and television viewing in middle-aged French adults. Br J Nutr. 2011. March;105(6):902–10. 10.1017/S000711451000440X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Liangpunsakul S. Relationship between alcohol intake and dietary pattern: Findings from NHANES III. World J Gastroenterol. 2010. August 28;16(32):4055–60. 10.3748/wjg.v16.i32.4055 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Kesse E, Clavel-Chapelon F, Slimani N, van Liere M. Do eating habits differ according to alcohol consumption? Results of a study of the French cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (E3N-EPIC). Am J Clin Nutr. 2001. September 1;74(3):322–7. 10.1093/ajcn/74.3.322 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Fawehinmi TO, Ilomäki J, Voutilainen S, Kauhanen J. Alcohol Consumption and Dietary Patterns: The FinDrink Study. PLoS ONE. 2012. June 12;7(6):e38607 10.1371/journal.pone.0038607 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Dallongeville J, Marécaux N, Fruchart J-C, Amouyel P. Cigarette Smoking Is Associated with Unhealthy Patterns of Nutrient Intake: a Meta-analysis. J Nutr. 1998. September 1;128(9):1450–7. 10.1093/jn/128.9.1450 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Vaz J dos S, Buffarini R, Kac G, Bielemann RM, Oliveira I, Menezes AB, et al. Dietary patterns are associated with blood lipids at 18-year-olds: a cross-sectional analysis nested in the 1993 Pelotas (Brazil) birth cohort. Nutr J. 2018;17(1):1–12. 10.1186/s12937-017-0311-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Michele Drehmer

21 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-35214

Age, sex and sociodemographic differences are associated with Brazilian dietary pattern: National Health Survey

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. dos Santos,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by January, 18th, 2021. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Michele Drehmer, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In statistical methods, please refer to any post-hoc corrections to correct for multiple comparisons during your statistical analyses. If these were not performed please justify the reasons. Please refer to our statistical reporting guidelines for assistance (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines.#loc-statistical-reporting).

3. In your multivariable analyses, please state whether you accounted for clustering by locality. For example, did you consider using multilevel models?

4.We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.  

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

  • The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

  • A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

  • A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The manuscript addresses a topic of potential interest of PLOS ONE readers. The objective was 'to identify Brazilian dietary patterns and their associations with sociodemographic characteristics'. The authors conclude ‘their results suggest that strategies to promote healthy eating habits should focus on the younger population'. The rationale/concept of the manuscript is interesting. The article provides a unique opportunity to explore the dietary patterns of the Brazilian population. However, I suggest a revision to clarify some basic concepts related to the analysis. I have following major and minor comments:

Major comments

1. Components was extracted using the Factor Analysis, not Principal Components Analysis instead. They are similar but not quite the same. Could you clarify this point to avoid any confusion?

2. These patterns represent a hypothetical composition, such as ‘healthy diets’ or ‘unhealthy'. Those concepts (health vs unhealthy) are not new and does not reflect the diversity of the ‘real diet’. Furthermore, the idea of the protein pattern is a new approach, the article is well constructed with an expressive Brazilian sample that will be helpful for future studies.

3. I suggest Cattell’s scree test, to visualize the proportion of variance explained by each component/factor (eigenvalues)

4. There are seemingly contradictory pieces of information such: (lines 299-306). 'People with black and brown skin colour and indigenous heritage presented lower adherence to the healthy and western patterns (...) greater adherence to the protein pattern'; 'Indigenous, black, and brown people generally have less access to regular education, have lower incomes and perform low-paid activities. These factors also affect their food choices'. However, the protein pattern is composed of beans, red meat, fish, and chicken. Can people from low-income levels buy protein patterns? Lines 318-320 contradicted the information above, about skin color/income and diet intake: 'positive association between the highest educational level and the western pattern, which could be explained by purchasing power'. The discussion about income/skin color/education was a bit confusing for me.

Minor comments:

1. lines127. ‘The Bartlett test and Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin (KMO) coefficient were applied to verify the method applicability’... The KMO is relevant in the context of FA, but not PCA, which uses the "Kaiser rule".

2. lines 128-129. 'KMO≥0.6 was considered appropriate in the partial correlation between diet variables’. Values of 0.6 are considered not best choices, would be at least >0.7 to be considerable as intermediate values according to Kaiser (1975)

3. line 180. ‘The highest p-value for the Cronbach Alpha test was 0.55’ Cronbach Alpha test is lower than references recommendations, indicates as limit cut above 0.70 as acceptable, however ≥0.80 would better. (Griethuijsen et al., 2014, Cortina, J. M., 1993).

4. line 180-181. ‘Milk was not included in any of the dietary patterns due to a low factorial load’. I believe that information must be explored in more depth.

5. line 230. 'which explained 40% of the diet variability'. Is this percentage considered enough for the total variance explanation?

6. line 265. ‘Several factors could explain healthier eating habits in older individuals.’ There is only one reference to explain the whole background. The authors should rewrite with more information about these hypotheses.

Reviewer #2: This study examined the association between sociodemographic characteristics and the main Brazilian dietary patterns. This manuscript addresses an interesting nutrition topic using data of the Brazilian population. The study has its strengths and, overall, the article is well written, but I have some major comments.

1. Title: Aren't age and sex sociodemographic characteristics? The use of the term "sociodemographic characteristics" is not enough in the title?

2. Title: “Brazilian dietary pattern” or “Brazilian dietary patterns”?

3. Introduction: There are many sentences in the first paragraph of "Introduction" text without references. This needs to be revised. Example (Page 2-line 47): “Changes in dietary patterns associated with government initiatives have contributed to reducing disease prevalence related to nutritional deficiencies.”

4. Design and Study Population: Is this a cross-sectional study? Why is this not described in the study design?

5. Variables (Page 4-line 93): “The selected variables were age, sex, colour/race, marital status, education, area of residence, macro-region, socioeconomic status, physical activity, tobacco use, alcohol intake, self-related health status and multimorbidity.” This section of the manuscript describes behavioral, health and multimorbidity variables. However, only sociodemographic variables were explored in the study. What is the main reason for adopting this procedure? Exploring behavioral, health and multimorbidity characteristics with dietary patterns would make the article more robust and interesting.

6. Statistical Analysis: The principal component analysis (PCA) appears to have been well conducted. The food consumption questionnaire was composed of 22 food items. Is this number of food items considered adequate? This could be highlighted or otherwise weighted among the study's limitations.

7. Statistical Analysis (Page 5-line 138): “Robust Poisson regression models allow correction for overestimation of associations when outcomes are not rare (>10% prevalence)(28).” I believe that there is a better reference for this information, considering cross-sectional studies. [Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3(1):21. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-3-21.]

8. Statistical Analysis (Page 5-line 141): “Associations were presented as Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).” Is this the adequate measure of effect for the data under analysis? Is there any reason for not using the Prevalence Ratio?

9. Statistical Analysis: The description of the multivariate analysis model is confusing and needs to be revised. For example: Have demographic variables been adjusted to each other? Were behavioral, health and morbidity variables considered only as possible confounders? Why these variables were not explored as independent variables? If these characteristics are not explored as independent variables, I believe that it would be more appropriate to remove them from the analysis of the present study.

10. Results (Table 1): The data interpretation using the estimated sample size becomes confused. Is this form of presentation necessary?

11. Results (Page 10-line 194): “Table 3 shows the associations between the first quartile (Q1 - reference quartile) and the last quartile (Q4) of each pattern.” This procedure was not described and justified in the Methods section of the manuscript. Why was not the first quartile (Q1) compared to the sum of the remaining three (Q2 + Q3 + Q4)?

12. Results (Page 10-line 198): “In stratified analysis by macro-region, age showed a dose-response effect.” This sentence is not clear. Was this finding only for the regions and not for the national data (Brazil)?

13. Results: Table 3 is too long. I believe that this should be reduced. As most of the findings are similar across regions, Table 3 should only include national results (Brazil) and possible differences between regions should be described only in the text of the results.

14. Results: Table 3. The comparison groups (categories) of dietary patterns should be indicated in the title or heading of the Table.

15. Results: Table 3: The use of the following terms should be reviewed: “Crude” or Unadjusted? -- “(CI 95%)” or 95%CI? -- “<0.005” or <0.001?

16. Results: Table 3 (footnote): What mean "mutually adjusted models"?

17. Results: The ‘Results section’ should be thoroughly revised. Why the findings regarding ‘marital status’ and ‘skin color’ were not highlighted in the text, for example?

18. Discussion: First paragraph of the Discussion: why the main findings for the associations between sociodemographic factors and dietary patterns were not pointed out in the text?

19. Discussion (page 19-line 252): “The traditional Brazilian pattern is an intermediate pattern characterised by rice and beans consumption. This pattern was not identified in this study because the survey did not evaluate rice consumption.” Considering its regular consumption by the Brazilian population, what was the reason for this food item has not been evaluated?

20. Discussion (page 21-line 303): “Ethnicity is related to social inequalities and income distribution in Brazil and other developing countries.” This sentence needs reference (s).

21. Conclusion: The conclusion (last paragraph of the discussion) could be more explored and expanded. This could contemplate a synthesis of all sociodemographic aspects that showed an association in the study, in addition to age.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Feb 16;16(2):e0247078. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247078.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


27 Jan 2021

Reviewer #1: The manuscript addresses a topic of potential interest of PLOS ONE readers. The objective was 'to identify Brazilian dietary patterns and their associations with sociodemographic characteristics'. The authors conclude ‘their results suggest that strategies to promote healthy eating habits should focus on the younger population'. The rationale/concept of the manuscript is interesting. The article provides a unique opportunity to explore the dietary patterns of the Brazilian population. However, I suggest a revision to clarify some basic concepts related to the analysis. I have following major and minor comments:

Major comments

1. Components was extracted using the Factor Analysis, not Principal Components Analysis instead. They are similar but not quite the same. Could you clarify this point to avoid any confusion?

We apologize for the mistake, we actually performed Factor Analysis and this was duly correct into the text; line 132.

2. These patterns represent a hypothetical composition, such as ‘healthy diets’ or ‘unhealthy'. Those concepts (health vs unhealthy) are not new and does not reflect the diversity of the ‘real diet’. Furthermore, the idea of the protein pattern is a new approach, the article is well constructed with an expressive Brazilian sample that will be helpful for future studies.

We acknowledge reviewer’s comments, and we agree that it does not reflect the real diet; however, this is one of the limitations of nutritional epidemiology studies.

3. I suggest Cattell’s scree test, to visualize the proportion of variance explained by each component/factor (eigenvalues)

We included the scree plot in the manuscript, along with Table 2, which explains the partial variance of each dietary pattern and the total variance of the three patterns combined.

4. There are seemingly contradictory pieces of information such: (lines 299-306). 'People with black and brown skin colour and indigenous heritage presented lower adherence to the healthy and western patterns (...) greater adherence to the protein pattern'; 'Indigenous, black, and brown people generally have less access to regular education, have lower incomes and perform low-paid activities. These factors also affect their food choices'. However, the protein pattern is composed of beans, red meat, fish, and chicken. Can people from low-income levels buy protein patterns? Lines 318-320 contradicted the information above, about skin color/income and diet intake: 'positive association between the highest educational level and the western pattern, which could be explained by purchasing power'. The discussion about income/skin color/education was a bit confusing for me.

We apologize for the confusion and acknowledge the comment. The unclear topic was discussed in more detail in the manuscript; lines 372-381. We highlight that some specific characteristics in the Brazilian population and culture could explain these apparent contradictions: (i) among foods with high factor load in the protein pattern, beans are the protein source most affordable in Brazil. Rice and beans are components of a typical Brazilian meal consumed by every social class; (ii) indigenous cultivate and consume different species of beans in North and Northeast regions of Brazil; (iv) the cultural high consumption of barbecue in the Midwest and South regions of Brazil; (v) fishing is common among indigenous.

Minor comments:

1. lines127. ‘The Bartlett test and Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin (KMO) coefficient were applied to verify the method applicability’... The KMO is relevant in the context of FA, but not PCA, which uses the "Kaiser rule".

We apologize for the mistake, we actually performed FA and this was duly correct into the text; line 132.

2. lines 128-129. 'KMO≥0.6 was considered appropriate in the partial correlation between diet variables’. Values of 0.6 are considered not best choices, would be at least >0.7 to be considerable as intermediate values according to Kaiser (1975)

We acknowledge the reviewer for the comment and agree that KMO>0.7 would be more appropriate. We highlight that our study was based on secondary data and the diet was assessed considering only 22 healthy eating markers. Dietary studies using more detailed tools, as 24 hour recalls or food frequency questionnaires, have found similar KMO. Please find some references below:

Previdelli ÁN et al. Using Two Different Approaches to Assess Dietary Patterns: Hypothesis-Driven and Data-Driven Analysis. Nutrients. 2016 Oct;8(10):593.

Santos IKS dos, Conde WL. Trend in dietary patterns among adults from Brazilian state capitals. Rev Bras Epidemiol. 2020;23:e200035.

Carvalho CA, et al. Methods of a posteriori identification of food patterns in Brazilian children: a systematic review. Ciênc. saúde coletiva [Internet]. 2016 Jan [citado 2021 Jan 19] ; 21( 1 ): 143-154. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-81232016000100143&lng=pt. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232015211.18962014.

Liu X et al. Dietary patterns and the risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based case–control study in a rural population. Clin Nutr. 2017 Feb 1;36(1):260–6.

3. line 180. ‘The highest p-value for the Cronbach Alpha test was 0.55’ Cronbach Alpha test is lower than references recommendations, indicates as limit cut above 0.70 as acceptable, however ≥0.80 would better. (Griethuijsen et al., 2014, Cortina, J. M., 1993).

We agree that Cronbach’s Alpha test was lower than the recommended values by the above references. We assumed 0.55 as bordering. However, factor loads were higher than 0.3 for each food while the total KMO=0.61 and the total variance was 0.402. According to similar results in the literature, we concluded that factor analysis was applicable to the data.

4. line 180-181. ‘Milk was not included in any of the dietary patterns due to a low factorial load’. I believe that information must be explored in more depth.

In the final factor analysis, only food with factor load higher than 0.3 were maintained, thus milk was not included in any dietary pattern.

5. line 230. 'which explained 40% of the diet variability'. Is this percentage considered enough for the total variance explanation?

Based on the previous studies we considered 40% of the data variability to be enough. Please find below some examples of studies in nutritional epidemiology, which had similar results:

Schulze, MB, et al. Dietary patterns and their association with food and nutrient intake in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)–Potsdam study. British Journal of Nutrition, v. 85, n. 3, p. 363–373, mar. 2001

Cunha DB, et al. Association of dietary patterns with BMI and waist circumference in a low-income neighbourhood in Brazil. Br J Nutr. 2010 Sep;104(6):908–13.

Nascimento S, et al. Dietary availability patterns of the Brazilian macro-regions. Nutr J. 2011 Jul 28;10:79.

Previdelli ÁN, et al. Using Two Different Approaches to Assess Dietary Patterns: Hypothesis-Driven and Data-Driven Analysis. Nutrients. 2016 Oct;8(10):593.

Liu X, et al. Dietary patterns and the risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based case–control study in a rural population. Clin Nutr. 2017 Feb 1;36(1):260–6.

6. line 265. ‘Several factors could explain healthier eating habits in older individuals.’ There is only one reference to explain the whole background. The authors should rewrite with more information about these hypotheses.

We appreciate the reviewer’s comment. We revised the sentence and provided a more suitable scientific background to support our hypotheses.

Reviewer #2: This study examined the association between sociodemographic characteristics and the main Brazilian dietary patterns. This manuscript addresses an interesting nutrition topic using data of the Brazilian population. The study has its strengths and, overall, the article is well written, but I have some major comments.

1. Title: Aren't age and sex sociodemographic characteristics? The use of the term "sociodemographic characteristics" is not enough in the title?

We acknowledge the reviewer’s comment. Based on that, we rewrote the title more clearly. We highlight that the variables related to health and lifestyle characteristics were incorporated into the manuscript as suggested therefore, we changed the title accordingly.

2. Title: “Brazilian dietary pattern” or “Brazilian dietary patterns”?

We apologize for the mistake and agree that the correct term is dietary patterns.

3. Introduction: There are many sentences in the first paragraph of "Introduction" text without references. This needs to be revised. Example (Page 2-line 47): “Changes in dietary patterns associated with government initiatives have contributed to reducing disease prevalence related to nutritional deficiencies.”

We apologize for the mistake. The paragraph was revised and the references were added.

4. Design and Study Population: Is this a cross-sectional study? Why is this not described in the study design?

We acknowledge reviewer’s comment and duly added the study’s design description.

5. Variables (Page 4-line 93): “The selected variables were age, sex, colour/race, marital status, education, area of residence, macro-region, socioeconomic status, physical activity, tobacco use, alcohol intake, self-related health status and multimorbidity.” This section of the manuscript describes behavioral, health and multimorbidity variables. However, only sociodemographic variables were explored in the study. What is the main reason for adopting this procedure? Exploring behavioral, health and multimorbidity characteristics with dietary patterns would make the article more robust and interesting.

We acknowledge the thoughtful comment. We agree that exploring variables related to health and lifestyle characteristics make the manuscript more interesting. These variables were incorporated and discussed in the revised manuscript as independent variables.

6. Statistical Analysis: The principal component analysis (PCA) appears to have been well conducted. The food consumption questionnaire was composed of 22 food items. Is this number of food items considered adequate? This could be highlighted or otherwise weighted among the study's limitations.

We agree that is a limitation of the study and we acknowledge it in the manuscript‘s limitations. We highlight, however, that we used secondary data from the largest health survey (n=60,202) conducted in Brazil, the Brazilian National Health Survey - BNHS. The BNHS addresses several aspects related to health, diet being one of them. Even without applying more detailed tools, such as 24 hour recalls (24hR) or Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQ), the study was able to explain 40% of the diet variability. This percentage is higher than findings verified in many studies that used FFQ or 24hR. Please find below some examples of studies using other tools presenting similar results:

Schulze, MB, et al. Dietary patterns and their association with food and nutrient intake in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)–Potsdam study. British Journal of Nutrition, v. 85, n. 3, p. 363–373, mar. 2001

Cunha DB, et al. Association of dietary patterns with BMI and waist circumference in a low-income neighbourhood in Brazil. Br J Nutr. 2010 Sep;104(6):908–13.

Nascimento S, et al. Dietary availability patterns of the Brazilian macro-regions. Nutr J. 2011 Jul 28;10:79.

Liu X, et al. Dietary patterns and the risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A population-based case–control study in a rural population. Clin Nutr. 2017 Feb 1;36(1):260–6.

7. Statistical Analysis (Page 5-line 138): “Robust Poisson regression models allow correction for overestimation of associations when outcomes are not rare (>10% prevalence)(28).” I believe that there is a better reference for this information, considering cross-sectional studies. [Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3(1):21. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-3-21.]

We acknowledge the reviewer and inform you that the reference was cited in the manuscript.

8. Statistical Analysis (Page 5-line 141): “Associations were presented as Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).” Is this the adequate measure of effect for the data under analysis? Is there any reason for not using the Prevalence Ratio?

We acknowledge the thoughtful comment and apologize for the mistake. We agree that Prevalence Ratio is the appropriate measure since it is a cross-sectional study design. Based on that, we included the appropriated measure and interpretation to the results.

9. Statistical Analysis: The description of the multivariate analysis model is confusing and needs to be revised. For example: Have demographic variables been adjusted to each other? Were behavioral, health and morbidity variables considered only as possible confounders? Why these variables were not explored as independent variables? If these characteristics are not explored as independent variables, I believe that it would be more appropriate to remove them from the analysis of the present study.

We revised the topic and rewrite it. We hope it is clearer now. In the revised manuscript, the variables related to health and lifestyle characteristics were included and discussed as independent variables. We believe that the final version of the manuscript presents a more robust discussion about the association between dietary pattern and variables related to health and lifestyle.

10. Results (Table 1): The data interpretation using the estimated sample size becomes confused. Is this form of presentation necessary?

BNHS has a complex sample design. The sample design used conglomerates in three levels: primary units of sampling (first stage), household (second stage), and selection of the household adult resident (third stage). We considered this complexity in all analysis. For this reason, we believe that the interpretation using the estimated population size is more appropriate than mentioning only the sample size itself.

11. Results (Page 10-line 194): “Table 3 shows the associations between the first quartile (Q1 - reference quartile) and the last quartile (Q4) of each pattern.” This procedure was not described and justified in the Methods section of the manuscript. Why was not the first quartile (Q1) compared to the sum of the remaining three (Q2 + Q3 + Q4)?

We aimed to compare the two extremes of the diet (first and fourth quartiles). We believed that the sum of the Q2+Q3+Q4 would not capture the associations between these quartiles: people from the first and the second quartiles have similar scores for the dietary patterns, for example. Nevertheless, we included the tables describing associations between intermediate quartiles (Q1-Q2 and Q1/Q3) as Supporting Information material.

12. Results (Page 10-line 198): “In stratified analysis by macro-region, age showed a dose-response effect.” This sentence is not clear. Was this finding only for the regions and not for the national data (Brazil)?

We apologize and clarify that the dose-response effect was also observed in the national analysis. The correction was made in the manuscript; line 227.

13. Results: Table 3 is too long. I believe that this should be reduced. As most of the findings are similar across regions, Table 3 should only include national results (Brazil) and possible differences between regions should be described only in the text of the results.

We appreciate the suggestion. In the revised manuscript, table 3 was reduced and present only the national findings; the main differences between regions are described in the text. The regional findings are now provided in the supporting information material.

14. Results: Table 3. The comparison groups (categories) of dietary patterns should be indicated in the title or heading of the Table.

We acknowledge for the suggestion. We included in the tables’ captions.

15. Results: Table 3: The use of the following terms should be reviewed: “Crude” or Unadjusted? -- “(CI 95%)” or 95%CI? -- “<0.005” or <0.001?

We acknowledge the reviewer for point out these inconsistencies, which were rectified. In accordance with manuscripts published in this field, we choose the term "Crude" to refer to the Prevalence Ratios of the univariate analyses.

16. Results: Table 3 (footnote): What mean "mutually adjusted models"?

This footnote was revised and the term was deleted since we included health and lifestyle characteristics. We explored the association between dietary patterns - as the dependent variable - and variables related to health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics. In the modeling, we have no independent variable as the main variable. All multivariate models were (mutually) adjusted for all significant independent variables, since these variables were not considered only as confounders.

17. Results: The ‘Results section’ should be thoroughly revised. Why the findings regarding ‘marital status’ and ‘skin color’ were not highlighted in the text, for example?

We revised the section and the findings related to marital status, skin color and those related to health and lifestyle characteristics were included in the revised manuscript.

18. Discussion: First paragraph of the Discussion: why the main findings for the associations between sociodemographic factors and dietary patterns were not pointed out in the text?

We acknowledge the reviewer to point out this issue. In the revised manuscript, the main findings were briefly described in the first paragraph as suggested.

19. Discussion (page 19-line 252): “The traditional Brazilian pattern is an intermediate pattern characterised by rice and beans consumption. This pattern was not identified in this study because the survey did not evaluate rice consumption.” Considering its regular consumption by the Brazilian population, what was the reason for this food item has not been evaluated?

This is a limitation of the study. BNHS prioritized the assessment of healthy eating food markers and rice was not included. We highlighted and discussed this gap in the revised manuscript. Beans with rice is the most traditional food combination in Brazil.

20. Discussion (page 21-line 303): “Ethnicity is related to social inequalities and income distribution in Brazil and other developing countries.” This sentence needs reference (s).

We provided updated reference in the revised manuscript to support our sentence.

21. Conclusion: The conclusion (last paragraph of the discussion) could be more explored and expanded. This could contemplate a synthesis of all sociodemographic aspects that showed an association in the study, in addition to age.

We acknowledge for the suggestion. The conclusion was rewritten.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Michele Drehmer

1 Feb 2021

Health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics are associated with Brazilian dietary patterns: Brazilian National Health Survey

PONE-D-20-35214R1

Dear Dr. dos Santos,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Michele Drehmer, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

I have no further comments.

Acceptance letter

Michele Drehmer

4 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-35214R1

Health, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics are associated with Brazilian dietary patterns: Brazilian National Health Survey

Dear Dr. Monteiro dos Santos:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Michele Drehmer

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Southeast Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S2 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the South Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S3 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Midwest Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S4 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S5 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the North Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 4 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S6 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S7 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Southeast Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S8 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the South Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S9 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Midwest Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S10 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S11 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the North Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 2 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S12 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S13 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Southeast Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S14 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the South Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S15 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Midwest Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S16 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the Northeast Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    S17 Table. Associations between dietary patterns, lifestyle, health and sociodemographic characteristics in the North Region of Brazil.

    Comparison between quartile 1 and quartile 3 for each dietary pattern.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/saude/9160-pesquisa-nacional-de-saude.html?=&t=o-que-e.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES