Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29991345›Full record

ArticleNutrition journal2018

Greater vegetable variety and amount are associated with lower prevalence of coronary heart disease: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999-2014.

Zach Conrad, Susan Raatz, Lisa Jahns

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrition journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Diet Quality and Eating Practices among Hispanic/Latino Men and Women: NHANES 2011-2016.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zach ConradUS Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, 2420 2nd Ave. N, Grand Forks, ND, 58203, USA. zach.conrad@ars.usda.gov.ORCID 0000-0001-5376-8775
Susan RaatzUS Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, 2420 2nd Ave. N, Grand Forks, ND, 58203, USA.
Lisa JahnsUS Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, 2420 2nd Ave. N, Grand Forks, ND, 58203, USA.

Funding

U.S. Department of Agriculture USDA-ARS 3062-51000-051-00DU.S. Department of Agriculture USDA-ARS 3062-51000-053-00D
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) provides specific intake recommendations for vegetable variety and amount in order to protect against chronic disease. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have examined the link between DGA recommended vegetable variety and cardiometabolic disease. To address this research gap, our aim was to estimate the relationship between vegetable variety, vegetable amount, and prevalent cardiometabolic disease subtypes, and to assess potential determinants of vegetable variety.

methodsData on food intake and reported cardiometabolic disease status were acquired for 38,981 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999-2014). Vegetable variety was measured using a modified dietary diversity index that was adjusted for the potential confounding effects of vegetable amount. Temporal trends in vegetable variety and amount were assessed using univariate linear regression models. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate the relationship between vegetable variety and prevalent disease, and between vegetable amount and prevalent disease. Multivariate ordered logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between vegetable variety and explanatory variables.

resultsOverall, vegetable variety decreased (P = 0.035) from 1999 to 2014, but vegetable amount did not (P = 0.864). Intake of starchy vegetables decreased (P < 0.001), and intake of dark green vegetables increased (P < 0.001) over this 16-year period, but no trends were observed for other subgroups. An inverse linear relationship was observed between vegetable variety and prevalent coronary heart disease (P-trend = 0.032) but not other prevalent diseases; and between vegetable amount and coronary heart disease (P-trend = 0.026) but not other prevalent diseases. Individuals who reported consuming dark green vegetables had lower odds of having cardiovascular disease (0.86, 95% CI: 0.74-0.99) and coronary heart disease (0.78, 0.65-0.94) compared to individuals who reported not consuming any green vegetables. Living with a domestic partner was associated with greater vegetable variety (P = < 0.001), and currently smoking was associated with lower vegetable variety (P = < 0.001). Vegetable variety and amount were positively associated (P < 0.001).

conclusionsVegetable variety and amount were inversely associated with prevalent coronary heart disease. Vegetable variety was strongly associated with vegetable amount, likely mediated by reduced habituation and increased liking. Increasing vegetable variety and amount are still important messages for the public.

Indexed as

Nutrition PolicyNutrition SurveysVegetablesAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesCoronary DiseaseDietDiet, HealthyFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMetabolic DiseasesMiddle AgedRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID29991345
PMCPMC6040059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.