Dataset Information

Mis-reporting, previous health status and health status of family may seriously bias the association between food patterns and disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Food pattern analyses are popular tools in the study of associations between diet and health. However, there is a need for further evaluation of this methodology. The aim of the present cross-sectional study was to evaluate the relationship between food pattern groups (FPG) and existing health, and to identify factors influencing this relationship.

Methods

The inhabitants of Västerbotten County in northern Sweden are invited to health check-ups when they turn 30, 40, 50, and 60 years of age. The present study includes data collected from almost 60,000 individuals between 1992 and 2005. Associations between FPG (established using K-means cluster analyses) and health were analyzed separately in men and women.

Results

The health status of the participants and their close family and reporting accuracy differed significantly between men and women and among FPG. Crude regression analyses, with the high fat FPG as reference, showed increased risks for several health outcomes for all other FPGs in both sexes. However, when limiting analysis to individuals without previous ill-health and with adequate energy intake reports, most of the risks instead showed a trend towards protective effects.

Conclusions

Food pattern classifications reflect both eating habits and other own and family health related factors, a finding important to remember and to adjust for before singling out the diet as a primary cause for present and future health problems. Appropriate exclusions are suggested to avoid biases and attenuated associations in nutrition epidemiology.

SUBMITTER: Hornell A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2988699 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mis-reporting, previous health status and health status of family may seriously bias the association between food patterns and disease.

Hörnell Agneta A Winkvist Anna A Hallmans Göran G Weinehall Lars L Johansson Ingegerd I

Nutrition journal 20101030

<h4>Background</h4>Food pattern analyses are popular tools in the study of associations between diet and health. However, there is a need for further evaluation of this methodology. The aim of the present cross-sectional study was to evaluate the relationship between food pattern groups (FPG) and existing health, and to identify factors influencing this relationship.<h4>Methods</h4>The inhabitants of Västerbotten County in northern Sweden are invited to health check-ups when they turn 30, 40, 50 ...[more]

PMID: 21034501

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDietary patterns represent a broad picture of food and nutrient consumption and may be more predictive of health outcomes than individual foods and nutrients.ObjectiveWe investigated the relations among race, gender, family structure, parental socioeconomic status (SES), dietary patterns, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) profiles among adolescents in the southeastern region of the United States.MethodsA total of 743 adolescents from a cross-sectional study were divided into 4 dietary pattern groups by K-means cluster analysis. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to determine the relations among the parental SES, family structures, and dietary patterns of the adolescents. Associations between dietary patterns and CVD profiles were analyzed by multiple linear regression.ResultsFour dietary patterns were derived: "healthy" (17%), "snacks and sweets" (26%), "processed meat" (20%), and "sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) and fried food" (37%). Whites and females were more likely to have a "healthy" dietary pattern (Ps < 0.001). There were significant race/ethnicity differences in family structures, SES, and dietary patterns (Ps < 0.05). In whites, higher mother's education and father's education and occupation were associated with greater likelihood of a "healthy" dietary pattern (Ps < 0.05). Stay-at-home mother was associated with less likelihood of an "SSB and fried food" pattern (P = 0.023). In blacks, higher mother's occupation, father's education, and living with both parents were associated with more likelihood of a "healthy" dietary pattern (Ps < 0.05). Stay-at-home father was associated with less likelihood of the "snacks and sweets" (P = 0.025) and "SSB and fried food" dietary patterns (P = 0.044). Overall, adolescents with poor dietary patterns exhibited higher percentage body fat, waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, fasting insulin, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, C-reactive protein, and total triglyceride (Ps < 0.05).ConclusionsOur data suggest that family structure, parental working status, and SES are associated with the diet quality in adolescents. Moreover, "snacks and sweets," "processed meat," and "SSB and fried food" dietary patterns are all associated with worse CVD risk profiles.

Project description:BackgroundImproved understanding of the quality of survival of patients is crucial in evaluating trauma care, understanding recovery patterns and timeframes, and informing healthcare, social, and disability service provision. We aimed to describe the longer-term health status of seriously injured patients, identify predictors of outcome, and establish recovery trajectories by population characteristics.Methods and findingsA population-based, prospective cohort study using the Victorian State Trauma Registry (VSTR) was undertaken. We followed up 2,757 adult patients, injured between July 2011 and June 2012, through deaths registry linkage and telephone interview at 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-months postinjury. The 3-level EuroQol 5 dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) was collected, and mixed-effects regression modelling was used to identify predictors of outcome, and recovery trajectories, for the EQ-5D-3L items and summary score. Mean (SD) age of participants was 50.8 (21.6) years, and 72% were male. Twelve percent (n = 333) died during their hospital stay, 8.1% (n = 222) of patients died postdischarge, and 155 (7.0%) were known to have survived to 36-months postinjury but were lost to follow-up at all time points. The prevalence of reporting problems at 36-months postinjury was 37% for mobility, 21% for self-care, 47% for usual activities, 50% for pain/discomfort, and 41% for anxiety/depression. Continued improvement to 36-months postinjury was only present for the usual activities item; the adjusted relative risk (ARR) of reporting problems decreased from 6 to 12 (ARR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.90), 12 to 24 (ARR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.90-0.98), and 24 to 36 months (ARR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.95-0.99). The risk of reporting problems with pain or discomfort increased from 24- to 36-months postinjury (ARR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.12). While loss to follow-up was low, there was responder bias with patients injured in intentional events, younger, and less seriously injured patients less likely to participate; therefore, these patient subgroups were underrepresented in the study findings.ConclusionsThe prevalence of ongoing problems at 3-years postinjury is high, confirming that serious injury is frequently a chronic disorder. These findings have implications for trauma system design. Investment in interventions to reduce the longer-term impact of injuries is needed, and greater investment in primary prevention is needed.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies of drug trials submitted to regulatory authorities have documented selective reporting of both entire trials and favorable results. The objective of this study is to determine the publication rate of efficacy trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in approved New Drug Applications (NDAs) and to compare the trial characteristics as reported by the FDA with those reported in publications.Methods and findingsThis is an observational study of all efficacy trials found in approved NDAs for New Molecular Entities (NMEs) from 2001 to 2002 inclusive and all published clinical trials corresponding to the trials within the NDAs. For each trial included in the NDA, we assessed its publication status, primary outcome(s) reported and their statistical significance, and conclusions. Seventy-eight percent (128/164) of efficacy trials contained in FDA reviews of NDAs were published. In a multivariate model, trials with favorable primary outcomes (OR = 4.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33-17.1, p = 0.018) and active controls (OR = 3.4, 95% CI 1.02-11.2, p = 0.047) were more likely to be published. Forty-one primary outcomes from the NDAs were omitted from the papers. Papers included 155 outcomes that were in the NDAs, 15 additional outcomes that favored the test drug, and two other neutral or unknown additional outcomes. Excluding outcomes with unknown significance, there were 43 outcomes in the NDAs that did not favor the NDA drug. Of these, 20 (47%) were not included in the papers. The statistical significance of five of the remaining 23 outcomes (22%) changed between the NDA and the paper, with four changing to favor the test drug in the paper (p = 0.38). Excluding unknowns, 99 conclusions were provided in both NDAs and papers, nine conclusions (9%) changed from the FDA review of the NDA to the paper, and all nine did so to favor the test drug (100%, 95% CI 72%-100%, p = 0.0039).ConclusionsMany trials were still not published 5 y after FDA approval. Discrepancies between the trial information reviewed by the FDA and information found in published trials tended to lead to more favorable presentations of the NDA drugs in the publications. Thus, the information that is readily available in the scientific literature to health care professionals is incomplete and potentially biased.

Project description:BackgroundSurrogate accuracy in predicting patient treatment preferences (i.e., what patients want) has been studied extensively, but it is not known whether surrogates can predict how patients want loved ones to make end-of-life decisions on their behalf.ObjectiveTo evaluate the ability of family members to correctly identify the preferences of seriously-ill patients regarding family involvement in decision making.DesignCross-sectional survey.ParticipantsTwenty-five pancreatic cancer and 27 amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients and their family members (52 dyads total).Main measuresPatients and family members completed the Decision Control Preferences (DCP) scale regarding patient preferences for family involvement in health care decisions using conscious and unconscious scenarios.Key resultsPatient and family member agreement was 56% (29/52 dyads) for the conscious scenario (kappa 0.29) and 46% (24/52 dyads) for the unconscious scenario (kappa 0.15). Twenty-four family members identified the patient's preference as independent in the unconscious scenario, but six of these patients actually preferred shared decision making and six preferred reliant decision making. In the conscious scenario, preference for independent decision making was associated with higher odds of patient-family agreement (AOR 5.28, 1.07-26.06). In the unconscious scenario, cancer patients had a higher odds of agreement than ALS patients (AOR 3.86; 95% CI 1.02-14.54).ConclusionFamily members were often unable to correctly identify patient preferences for family involvement in end-of-life decision making, especially when patients desired that decisions be made using the best-interest standard. Clinicians and family members should consider explicitly eliciting patient preferences for family involvement in decision making. Additional research is still needed to identify interventions to improve family member understanding of patient preferences regarding the decision-making process itself.

Project description:Strategies to identify and mitigate publication bias and outcome reporting bias are frequently adopted in systematic reviews of clinical interventions but it is not clear how often these are applied in systematic reviews relating to quantitative health services and delivery research (HSDR). We examined whether these biases are mentioned and/or otherwise assessed in HSDR systematic reviews, and evaluated associating factors to inform future practice. We randomly selected 200 quantitative HSDR systematic reviews published in the English language from 2007-2017 from the Health Systems Evidence database (www.healthsystemsevidence.org). We extracted data on factors that may influence whether or not authors mention and/or assess publication bias or outcome reporting bias. We found that 43% (n = 85) of the reviews mentioned publication bias and 10% (n = 19) formally assessed it. Outcome reporting bias was mentioned and assessed in 17% (n = 34) of all the systematic reviews. Insufficient number of studies, heterogeneity and lack of pre-registered protocols were the most commonly reported impediments to assessing the biases. In multivariable logistic regression models, both mentioning and formal assessment of publication bias were associated with: inclusion of a meta-analysis; being a review of intervention rather than association studies; higher journal impact factor, and; reporting the use of systematic review guidelines. Assessment of outcome reporting bias was associated with: being an intervention review; authors reporting the use of Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE), and; inclusion of only controlled trials. Publication bias and outcome reporting bias are infrequently assessed in HSDR systematic reviews. This may reflect the inherent heterogeneity of HSDR evidence and different methodological approaches to synthesising the evidence, lack of awareness of such biases, limits of current tools and lack of pre-registered study protocols for assessing such biases. Strategies to help raise awareness of the biases, and methods to minimise their occurrence and mitigate their impacts on HSDR systematic reviews, are needed.

Dataset Information

Mis-reporting, previous health status and health status of family may seriously bias the association between food patterns and disease.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Mis-reporting, previous health status and health status of family may seriously bias the association between food patterns and disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets