Adherence to emerging plant-based dietary patterns and its association with cardiovascular disease risk in a nationally representative sample of Canadian adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectivesLittle is known about the role of emerging plant-based dietary patterns in cardiovascular disease (CVD) at the national population level. The objectives of this research were to assess the validity and reliability of newly-established plant-based dietary indices, and to evaluate their associations with CVD risk among Canadian adults.
 ApproachData were obtained from repeated 24-hour dietary recalls of adult participants in the cross-sectional, nationally representative Canadian Community Health Survey cycle 2004 linked to vital statistics (n=12,323) and cycle 2015 (n=14,026). Plant-based diet quality was assessed with a revised Plant-based Dietary Index (PDI), EAT-Lancet Reference Diet (ERD) score and the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans Adherence Index (DGAI) 2020. Weighted multivariate analyses were used for testing associations between diet quality and lifestyle characteristics, and weighted multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional-hazards models for associations with CVD risk.
 ResultsConstruct validity was confirmed for the revised PDI and DGAI 2020 (but not ERD) as participants in the highest (healthiest) quartile, compared to those in the lowest (least healthy), were more likely to be female (52.63±1.27% compared to 44.8±1.65% for revised PDI; 59.37±2.01% compared to 40.84±1.71% for DGAI 2020), older (50.55±0.39 compared to 45.56±0.43 for revised PDI; 51.57±0.39 compared to 46.35±0.54 for DGAI 2020), to have post-secondary education (32.36±1.55% compared to 21.12±1.31% for revised PDI; 34.17±2.69% compared to 17.87±0.98% for DGAI 2020), and less likely to be daily smokers (8.21±1% compared to 17.06±1.45% for revised PDI; 7.36±1.71% compared to 21.53±1.58% for DGAI 2020) (P-trend<0.0001). No significant associations were observed between dietary index scores and CVD risk.
 ConclusionsRevised PDI and DGAI 2020 provided valid and meaningful measures of plant-based eating among Canadians, while validity of ERD was not directly confirmed. Adherence to the plant-based dietary patterns was not associated with CVD risk. Future large-scale analyses are necessary to further evaluate the role of plant-based eating in CVD prevention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".