Skip to main content

Table 4 Beta coefficient and 95% CI of changes in insulin indices per each quartile increase of nutrient patterns

From: A nutrient pattern characterized by vitamin A, C, B6, potassium, and fructose is associated with reduced risk of insulin‐related disorders: A prospective study among participants of Tehran lipid and glucose study

 

Insulin changes

HOMA_IR changes

HOMA-S changes

Βa (95% CI)

P value

Β(95% CI)

P-value

Β(95% CI)

P-value

Pattern 1

 Model 1b

0.21 (−0.04–0.47)

0.108

0.09 (0.01–0.18)

0.028

−1.58 (−3.34–0.17)

0.078

 Model 2c

0.23 (−0.03–0.49)

0.081

0.09 (0.01 –0.18)

0.030

−1.47 (−3.22–0.26)

0.097

 Model 3d

0.23 (−0.07 –0.53)

0.137

0.08 (−0.01–0.19)

0.094

−1.46 (−3.19–0.26)

0.097

Pattern 2

 Model 1b

−0.00 (−0.26–0.25)

0.962

−0.00 (−0.09–0.08)

0.947

−0.50 (−2.23–1.23)

0.571

 Model 2c

−0.04 (−0.30–0.22)

0.751

−0.04 (−0.09–0.08)

0.878

−0.19 (−1.92–1.53)

0.824

 Model 3d

−0.04 (−0.34–0.25)

0.784

−0.02 (−0.12–0.07)

0.656

−0.37 −2.08–1.34)

0.670

Pattern 3

 Model 1b

−0.25 (–0.51–0.00)

0.05

-0.08 (–0.17–0.00)

0.051

1.13 (–0.61–2.88)

0.203

 Model 2c

–0.23 (–0.49 –0.02)

0.080

–0.08 (–0.16–0.00)

0.069

0.81 (–0.90–2.53)

0.352

 Model 3d

–0.22 (−0.52–0.06)

0.131

–0.08 (–0.18–0.01)

0.094

0.40 (–1.25–2.38)

0.835

Pattern 4

 Model 1b

–0.12 (–0.38–0.13)

0.348

–0.03 (–0.12–0.05)

0.411

0.61 (–1.14–2.37)

0.496

 Model 2c

–0.09 (–0.35 –0.16)

0.477

–0.03 –0.11–0.05)

0.490

0.38 (–1.34–2.12)

0.660

 Model 3d

–0.07 (–0.37 –0.22)

0.623

–0.01 (–0.12–0.08)

0.712

0.16 (–1.53–1.86)

0.849

Pattern 5

 Model 1b

–0.35 (–0.61 to –0.09)

0.008

–0.09 (−0.18 to –0.00)

0.033

1.82 (0.05–3.59)

0.043

 Model 2c

−0.36 (−0.62 to −0.10)

0.007

−0.10 (−0.19 to –0.01)

0.022

1.92 (0.18–3.66)

0.030

 Model 3d

–0.38 (–0.67 to–0.08)

0.012

–0.11 (–0.21 to –0.01)

0.027

1.78 (0.11 – 3.82)

0.047

  1. aBeta regression coefficient; the positive B values indicated that higher adherence of nutrient patterns increase the higher changes in dependent variables and vice versa
  2. bAdjusted for age and sex
  3. cAdjusted for model 1 and body mass index, physical activity, and smoking (yes or no), energy intake, education levels (under diploma, diploma and associate degree, bachelor and higher), marital status (single, married), and employment status (employed, unemployed). For changes of insulin indexes, their values in baseline phase were adjusted
  4. dAdjusted for models 1 and 2 and diabetes status at baseline and family history of diabetes