Diet quality is associated with reduced incidence of cancer and self-reported chronic disease: Observations from Alberta's Tomorrow Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess diet quality using the Healthy Eating Index-2005 Canada (HEI-2005-Canada) and its association with risk of cancer and chronic disease in a sample of Alberta's Tomorrow Project (ATP) participants. Food frequency questionnaires completed by 25,169 participants (38% men; mean age 50.3 (9.2)) enrolled between 2000 and 2008 were used to calculate HEI-2005-Canada scores. Data from a subset of participants (n=10,735) who reported no chronic disease at enrollment were used to investigate the association between HEI-2005-Canada score and development of self-reported chronic disease at follow-up (2008). Participants were divided into HEI-2005-Canada score quartiles. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for cancer and chronic disease incidence. In this cohort, mean HEI-2005-Canada scores for men and women were 50.9 and 55.5 (maximum range 0-100), respectively. In men, higher HEI-2005-Canada score (Q4 vs. Q1) was associated with lower cancer risk (HR (95% CI) 0.63 (0.49-0.83)) over the course of follow-up (mean (SD)=10.4 (2.3) years); the same was not observed in women. In contrast, higher overall HEI-2005-Canada score (Q4 vs. Q1) was associated with lower risk of self-reported chronic disease (0.85 (0.75-0.97)) in both men and women over follow-up (4.2 (2.3) years). In conclusion, in this cohort better diet quality was associated with a lower risk of cancer in men and lower risk of chronic disease in both sexes. Future studies with longer follow-up and repeated measures of diet may be helpful to elucidate sex-specific associations between dietary quality and disease outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".