Skip to main content

Table 2 General characteristics of study participants by nut consumption frequency, N (%)

From: The relationship between nut intake and risk of colorectal cancer: a case control study

  Men (n = 1875)   Women (n = 894)  
Variable None < 1 serving per week 1–3 servings per week ≥3 servings per week P-valuea None < 1 serving per week 1–3 servings per week ≥3 servings per week P-valuea
Number 682 855 163 175   280 413 85 116  
Age (years) b 56.1 ± 9.4 57.0 ± 8.8 57.4 ± 8.2 58.0 ± 8.3 0.032 54.4 ± 11.0 55.4 ± 9.6 53.1 ± 9.0 56.5 ± 8.8 0.060
Marital status      0.706      0.028
 Married 622(91.2) 790(92.4) 149(91.4) 158(90.2)   212(75.7) 323(78.2) 76(89.4) 98(84.5)  
 Single 56(8.2) 57(6.7) 13(8.0) 12(6.9)   65(23.2) 87(21.1) 9(10.6) 17(15.7)  
 Missing 4(0.6) 8(0.9) 1(0.6) 5(2.9)   3(1.1) 3(0.7) 0(0.0) 1(0.8)  
Education level      0.001      <.001
 Less than high school 149(21.9) 156(18.2) 23(14.1) 30(17.1)   104(37.1) 113(27.4) 9(10.6) 18(15.5)  
 High school 241(35.3) 268(31.4) 42(25.8) 44(25.1)   121(43.2) 159(38.5) 36(43.4) 45(38.8)  
 College or above 282(41.4) 419(49.0) 92(56.4) 95(54.3)   53(18.9) 136(32.9) 39(45.9) 52(44.8)  
 Missing 10(1.4) 12(1.4) 6(3.7) 6(3.5)   2(0.8) 5(1.2) 1(1.1) 1(0.9)  
Income (1000 won/month)      0.532      0.066
  < 2000 182(26.7) 223(26.1) 35(21.5) 36(20.6)   81(28.9) 113(27.4) 19(22.4) 20(17.2)  
 2000–4000 284(41.6) 363(42.5) 67(41.1) 73(41.7)   115(41.1) 159(38.5) 33(38.8) 45(38.8)  
  > 4000 178(26.1) 231(27.0) 51(31.3) 53(30.3)   63(22.5) 118(28.6) 25(29.4) 43(37.1)  
 Missing 38(5.6) 38(4.4) 10(6.1) 13(7.4)   21(7.5) 23(5.5) 8(9.4) 8(6.9)  
Body mass index (kg/m2)      0.294      0.852
  < 25 434(63.6) 520(60.8) 109(66.9) 103(58.9)   199(71.1) 294(71.2) 62(72.9) 87(75.0)  
  ≥ 25 247(36.2) 335(39.2) 54(33.1) 72(41.1)   81(28.9) 119(28.8) 23(27.1) 29(25.0)  
 Missing 1(0.2) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0)   0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0)  
Smoking status      0.207      0.194
 Non-smoker 152(22.3) 167(19.5) 35(21.5) 36(20.6)   257(91.8) 385(93.2) 82(96.5) 111(95.7)  
 Ex-smoker 329(48.2) 456(53.3) 88(54.0) 101(57.7)   9(3.2) 15(3.6) 2(2.4) 5(4.3)  
 Current smoker 201(29.5) 232(27.2) 40(24.5) 38(21.7)   14(5.0) 13(3.2) 1(1.1) 0(0.0)  
Alcohol consumption      0.913      0.492
 Non-drinker 117(17.2) 135(15.8) 24(14.7) 30(17.1)   161(57.5) 253(61.2) 51(60.0) 69(59.5)  
 Ex-drinker 80(11.7) 117(13.7) 20(12.3) 22(12.6)   17(6.1) 30(7.3) 8(9.4) 4(3.4)  
 Current drinker 485(71.1) 603(70.5) 119(73.0) 123(70.3)   102(36.4) 130(31.5) 26(30.6) 43(37.1)  
Regular exercise      <.001      <.001
 No 359(52.6) 396(46.3) 69(42.3) 53(30.3)   184(65.7) 218(52.8) 45(52.9) 40(34.5)  
 Yes 309(45.3) 433(50.6) 92(56.4) 119(68.0)   96(34.3) 194(47.0) 40(47.1) 76(65.5)  
 Missing 14(2.1) 26(3.0) 2(1.2) 3(1.7)   0(0.0) 1(0.2) 0(0.0) 0(0.0)  
First-degree family history of cancer      0.309      0.283
 No 407(59.7) 473(55.3) 92(56.4) 106(60.6)   141(50.4) 231(55.9) 51(60.0) 59(50.9)  
 Yes 275(40.3) 379(44.3) 71(43.6) 68(38.9)   139(49.6) 182(44.1) 34(40.0) 57(49.1)  
 Missing 0(0.0) 3(0.4) 0(0.0) 1(0.5)   0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0)  
First-degree family history of colorectal cancer      0.363      0.402
 No 634(93.0) 795(93.0) 151(92.6) 168(96.0)   265(94.6) 379(91.8) 81(95.3) 107(92.2)  
 Yes 48(7.0) 57(6.7) 12(7.4) 6(3.4)   15(5.4) 34(8.2) 4(4.7) 9(7.8)  
 Missing 0(0.0) 3(0.3) 0(0.0) 1(0.6)   0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0)  
Fruit and vegetable intake, g/d2 290.4 ± 191.3 325.6 ± 217.1 384.8 ± 223.5 418.6 ± 251.4 <.001 383.1 ± 256.5 424.7 ± 265.5 476.3 ± 218.1 514.2 ± 280.0 <.001
Red meat intake, g/d2 60.2 ± 40.5 62.9 ± 40.9 66.1 ± 38.5 56.1 ± 38.4 0.071 39.9 ± 25.0 44.9 ± 28.3 48.5 ± 34.4 37.4 ± 26.8 0.004
Energy intake, kcal/d2 1803.6 ± 543.5 1860.2 ± 555.8 1937.0 ± 596.8 2045.0 ± 621.7 <.001 1597.4 ± 522.3 1633.4 ± 549.2 1840.8 ± 605.4 1885.5 ± 642.5 <.001
  1. aP-values were calculated by using the chi-square test for categorical variables and linear regression for continues variables. b Mean (s.d.) c Fruit and vegetable intake and red meat intake were adjusted for total individual energy intake by using the residual method