Identification of Dietary Patterns Associated with Chronic Disease Risk Using Hybrid Dimension Reduction Techniques: Evidence from the Canadian National Nutrition Survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Analysing dietary patterns is an important approach for characterizing the complex relationships between foods and nutrients in etiology of obesity and other chronic diseases. Several studies have used a priori and data‐driven dimension reduction techniques for evaluating dietary patterns in relation to chronic disease risks, even though methods for applying these techniques to complex nationally‐representative nutrition surveys are not yet developed. The objective of this study was to define a novel algorithm for using hybrid dimension reduction techniques for identifying dietary patterns of Canadians most strongly associated with obesity and other chronic diseases (diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular diseases) at the national population level. Dietary data were collected using 24‐hour dietary recalls (second recall in sub‐sample). All analyses included 11,748 participants (≥18 y) in the cross‐sectional nationally‐representative Canadian Community Health Survey 2.2 (2004/5). To ensure nationally‐representative estimates, weighting algorithm was incorporated into the partial least squares analyses (PLS), to derive an energy‐dense (ED), high‐fat (HF) and low fiber density (LFD) dietary pattern using 38 food groups. PLS is the most flexible hybrid technique for deriving dietary patterns enabling discovery of important disease‐specific dietary exposures that have not been previously identified in etiology of chronic diseases. The association of dietary patterns with obesity and chronic diseases was ascertained using weighted multinominal logistic regression‐GLM adjusted for the following covariates in successive models: age, sex, dietary misreporting, energy intakes, physical activity and smoking. Using the weighted PLS algorithm, an ED,HF,LFD dietary pattern was derived with high positive loadings for fast foods, carbonated drinks, refined grains and negative loadings for whole fruits, and vegetables (≥|0.17|). Food groups with a “high” loading were summed to form a simplified dietary pattern score. Moving from the first (healthiest) to the fourth (least healthy) quartiles of the ED,HF,LFD and the simplified dietary pattern scores was associated with increasingly elevated odds ratios (OR) for “obesity with at least one chronic disease” (diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular diseases), with individuals in quartile 4 having an OR of 2.57 (95%CI:1.75,3.76) and 2.73 (1.88,3.98), respectively (p‐trend<0.0001). The associations of dietary patterns with “healthy obesity” (obesity without having a chronic disease) and “being non‐obese with at least one chronic disease” were weaker, albeit significant (p<0.05). Overall, consuming an ED,HF,LFD dietary pattern was associated with significantly higher risk of obesity with and without accompanying chronic diseases. Our findings demonstrated that novel techniques for deriving dietary patterns can be modified for successful use in nationally‐representative surveys. The weighted algorithm we defined in this research can be used for deriving dietary patterns associated with chronic diseases at the national population level, improving the applicability and use of novel dietary pattern techniques by governments and researchers. Support or Funding Information This research was supported by a grant from the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Innovation in Regulatory Science Award, and funds to the Canadian Research Data Centre Network (CRDCN) from the Social Science and Humanities research Council (SSHRC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI) and Statistics Canada. M.J. was funded by a Burroughs Wellcome Fund Fellowship, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship, the CIHR/Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) Population Intervention for Chronic Disease Prevention (PICDP): A Pan‐Canadian Fellowship, Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS) and the Faculty of Medicine Hunter Fellowship (University of Toronto). M.L. is the Earle W. McHenry professor and is supported through chair endowed unrestricted research funds, University of Toronto. Funders had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».