Adherence to Mediterranean dietary pattern is inversely associated with depression, anxiety and psychological distress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Few studies have assessed adherence to the Mediterranean diet in relation to psychological health, in particular in the Middle East.Objective: To examine the association between adherence to Mediterranean dietary pattern and prevalence of psychological disorders among a large population of Iranian adults.Design: In this cross-sectional study on 3172 Iranian adults aged 18–55 years, we used a validated food frequency questionnaire for the assessment of dietary intakes. Adherence to the Mediterranean dietary pattern was examined using the Trichopoulou et al. method. To assess psychological health, the Iranian validated version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used. Psychological distress was assessed through the use of General Health Questionnaire (GHQ).Results: Mean age of study participants was 36.54 ± 4.97 years. After controlling for potential confounders, participants with the greatest adherence to the Mediterranean diet had lower odds for depression (OR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.46–0.78), anxiety (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.42–0.86) and psychological distress (OR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.45–0.79) compared with those with the lowest adherence. When the association with components of Mediterranean diet was examined, we found that high intake of fruits and vegetables was associated with a lower odds of depression, anxiety and psychological distress. In contrast, high intake of grains was positively associated with depression, anxiety and psychological distress.Conclusion: We found evidence indicating an inverse association between adherence to Mediterranean dietary pattern and odds of psychological disorders including depression, anxiety and psychological distress.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".