Skip to main content

Table 5 Multivariable adjusted regression coefficients for cardiometabolic risk markers per sex-specific tertiles (T) of dietary pattern 1 (n = 2121)a

From: Association between diet quality, dietary patterns and cardiometabolic health in Australian adults: a cross-sectional study

Characteristic Tertile of dietary pattern P-trendb
T1 T2 T3
HbA1c (mmol/mol)
 Model 1 ref 0.008 (0.007) 0.004 (0.001) 0.26
 Model 2 ref 0.007 (0.010) 0.020 (0.013) 0.13
Plasma glucose (mmol/L)
 Model 1 ref −0.017 (0.001) −0.007 (0.010) 0.52
 Model 2 ref −0.010 (0.008) 0.002 (0.010) 0.84
Total cholesterol (mmol/L)
 Model 1 ref −0.020 (0.016) −0.022 (0.019) 0.26
 Model 2 ref −0.015 (0.016) −0.017 (0.019) 0.40
HDL cholesterol (mmol/L)
 Model 1 ref 0.032 (0.021) 0.003 (0.020) 0.93
 Model 2 ref 0.017 (0.022) −0.016 (0.019) 0.37
LDL cholesterol (mmol/L)
 Model 1 ref −0.035 (0.023) −0.027 (0.029) 0.37
 Model 2 ref −0.027 (0.024) −0.016 (0.028) 0.58
Triglycerides (mmol/L)
 Model 1 ref −0.063 (0.032) −0.067 (0.036) 0.07
 Model 2 ref −0.031 (0.033) −0.030 (0.035) 0.41
Apolipoprotein B (g/L)
 Model 1 ref −0.041 (0.025) −0.022 (0.028) 0.46
 Model 2 ref −0.027 (0.025) −0.005 (0.026) 0.88
BMI (kg/m2)
 Model 1 ref −0.048 (0.012) − 0.056 (0.015) < 0.001
 Model 2
Waist circumference (cm)
 Model 1 ref −0.032 (0.009) −0.035 (0.010) 0.001
 Model 2
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)
 Model 1 ref 1.431 (1.132) 0.753 (1.376) 0.61
 Model 2 ref 2.132 (1.091) 1.571 (1.286) 0.25
Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg)
 Model 1 ref 0.708 (0.879) −0.566 (1.024) 0.56
 Model 2 ref 1.530 (0.850) 0.394 (1.004) 0.74
Overall cardiometabolic risk score
 Model 1 ref −0.097 (0.038) −0.082 (0.042) 0.061
 Model 2
  1. aBMI body mass index; Values represent regression coefficients and SE. Overall cardiometabolic risk score was based on WC, TAG, HDL-cholesterol, blood pressure (average blood pressure was used as an index for systolic and diastolic blood pressure), and fasting plasma glucose based on an established methodology [30]
  2. bLinear regression analyses were used to test for significant differences across tertiles of dietary pattern score. Analyses were adjusted for Model 1 and Model 2. Model 1 adjusted for age (continuous), sex, smoking (categorical), physical activity (binary), education (categorical), urban or rural location (categorical), energy misreporting (continuous), dieting (categorical) or atypical dietary intake on day of reporting (categorical) and family history of diabetes. Blood biomarkers and blood pressure outcomes were further adjusted for BMI in Model 2