Skip to main content

Table 2 Hazard ratios of cardiometabolic diseases by quintiles of the traditional northern dietary pattern among 477,465 participants

From: Dietary patterns and cardiometabolic diseases in 0.5 million Chinese adults: a 10-year cohort study

Endpoints

Traditional northern dietary pattern

P trend

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

CVD

 Cases

25,118

27,083

26,571

30,448

28,495

 

 Incidence density (1/1000 PYs)

26.1

25.6

25.5

24.4

23.1

 

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref.)

0.98 (0.96, 0.99)

0.99 (0.97, 1.01)

0.96 (0.93, 0.98)

0.90 (0.87, 0.93)

< 0.001

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref.)

0.97 (0.95, 0.98)

0.96 (0.94, 0.98)

0.94 (0.91, 0.96)

0.90 (0.87, 0.93)

< 0.001

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref.)

0.97 (0.96, 0.99)

0.96 (0.94, 0.98)

0.94 (0.92, 0.97)

0.92 (0.89, 0.95)

< 0.001

MCE

 Cases

966

1596

1665

2277

2366

 

 Incidence density (1/1000 PYs)

1.0

0.9

0.9

0.8

0.8

 

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref.)

1.01 (0.93, 1.11)

0.98 (0.90, 1.07)

0.90 (0.80, 1.00)

0.88 (0.77, 1.00)

0.017

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref.)

1.00 (0.92, 1.09)

0.97 (0.88, 1.06)

0.91 (0.81, 1.01)

0.92 (0.80, 1.04)

0.121

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref.)

1.01 (0.93, 1.10)

0.96 (0.87, 1.05)

0.90 (0.80, 1.00)

0.92 (0.81, 1.05)

0.118

HS

 Cases

1654

2085

1749

2132

2138

 

 Incidence density (1/1000 PYs)

1.5

1.4

1.2

1.1

0.8

 

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref.)

0.95 (0.89, 1.02)

0.86 (0.79, 0.93)

0.81 (0.73, 0.90)

0.62 (0.54, 0.71)

< 0.001

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref.)

0.95 (0.89, 1.03)

0.87 (0.81, 0.94)

0.85 (0.76, 0.94)

0.68 (0.59, 0.78)

< 0.001

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref.)

1.00 (0.93, 1.07)

0.89 (0.82, 0.96)

0.89 (0.80, 0.98)

0.78 (0.68, 0.89)

< 0.001

IS

 Cases

5883

6947

8328

10,708

10,801

 

 Incidence density (1/1000 PYs)

6.5

6.4

6.3

5.6

5.1

 

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref.)

1.01 (0.97, 1.05)

1.01 (0.97, 1.05)

0.92 (0.88, 0.96)

0.84 (0.79, 0.89)

< 0.001

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref.)

1.00 (0.96, 1.04)

0.98 (0.94, 1.02)

0.91 (0.86, 0.95)

0.84 (0.79, 0.89)

< 0.001

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref.)

1.01 (0.97, 1.04)

0.97 (0.94, 1.01)

0.91 (0.87, 0.96)

0.86 (0.81, 0.92)

< 0.001

Diabetes

 Cases

5433

4141

3619

2493

1726

 

 Incidence density (1/1000 PYs)

3.3

3.1

3.2

2.8

2.7

 

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref.)

0.93 (0.89, 0.97)

1.00 (0.95, 1.05)

0.86 (0.80, 0.92)

0.82 (0.74, 0.92)

< 0.001

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref.)

0.91 (0.87, 0.95)

0.92 (0.88, 0.97)

0.80 (0.74, 0.86)

0.82 (0.74, 0.92)

< 0.001

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref.)

0.91 (0.87, 0.96)

0.93 (0.88, 0.98)

0.81 (0.75, 0.87)

0.85 (0.76, 0.94)

< 0.001

  1. Incidence density was adjusted for age at recruitment, sex and survey sites. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox models with stratification on survey sites and age-at-risk (5-year groups). Model 1 was adjusted for sex, age at recruitment, education level. Model 2 was additionally adjusted for smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, the average daily energy intake, spicy food, family history of CVD or diabetes, body mass index, and waist circumference. Model 3 was additionally adjusted for prevalent diabetes, antihypertensive drugs use, and systolic blood pressure. Tests for linear trend were conducted by assigning the median value to each quintile and modelling it as a continuous variable in the Cox model
  2. CVD: cardiovascular disease. MCE: major coronary events. HS: haemorrhagic stroke. IS: ischaemic stroke. PY: person year
  3. * Analyses were performed among 451,846 diabetic participants