Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index-2015 Reedy, Jill; Lerman, Jennifer L.; Krebs-Smith, Susan M. ...
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics,
September 2018, 2018-09-00, 20180901, Letnik:
118, Številka:
9
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
The Healthy Eating Index (HEI), a diet quality index that measures alignment with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, was updated with the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
To evaluate ...the psychometric properties of the HEI-2015, eight questions were examined: five relevant to construct validity, two related to reliability, and one to assess criterion validity.
Three data sources were used: exemplary menus (n=4), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012 (N=7,935), and the National Institutes of Health-AARP (formally known as the American Association of Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study (N=422,928).
Exemplary menus: Scores were calculated using the population ratio method. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2011-2012: Means and standard errors were estimated using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach. Analyses were stratified to compare groups (with t tests and analysis of variance). Principal components analysis examined the number of dimensions. Pearson correlations were estimated between components, energy, and Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study: Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine scores and mortality outcomes.
For construct validity, the HEI-2015 yielded high scores for exemplary menus as four menus received high scores (87.8 to 100). The mean score for National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was 56.6, and the first to 99th percentile were 32.6 to 81.2, respectively, supporting sufficient variation. Among smokers, the mean score was significantly lower than among nonsmokers (53.3 and 59.7, respectively) (P<0.01), demonstrating differentiation between groups. The correlation between diet quality and diet quantity was low (all <0.25) supporting these elements being independent. The components demonstrated multidimensionality when examined with a scree plot (at least four dimensions). For reliability, most of the intercorrelations among the components were low to moderate (0.01 to 0.49) with a few exceptions, and the standardized Cronbach’s alpha was .67. For criterion validity, the highest vs the lowest quintile of HEI-2015 scores were associated with a 13% to 23% decreased risk of all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality.
The results demonstrated evidence supportive of construct validity, reliability, and criterion validity. The HEI-2015 can be used to examine diet quality relative to the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Following the publication of the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) and American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) Third Expert Report, a collaborative group was formed to develop a ...standardized scoring system and provide guidance for research applications.
The 2018 WCRF/AICR Cancer Prevention Recommendations, goals, and statements of advice were examined to define components of the new Score. Cut-points for scoring were based on quantitative guidance in the 2018 Recommendations and other guidelines, past research that operationalized 2007 WCRF/AICR Recommendations, and advice from the Continuous Update Project Expert Panel.
Eight of the ten 2018 WCRF/AICR Recommendations concerning weight, physical activity, diet, and breastfeeding (optional), were selected for inclusion. Each component is worth one point: 1, 0.5, and 0 points for fully, partially, and not meeting each recommendation, respectively (Score: 0 to 7-8 points). Two recommendations on dietary supplement use and for cancer survivors are not included due to operational redundancy. Additional guidance stresses the importance of accounting for other risk factors (e.g., smoking) in relevant models.
The proposed 2018 WCRF/AICR Score is a practical tool for researchers to examine how adherence to the 2018 WCRF/AICR Recommendations relates to cancer risk and mortality in various adult populations.
Background: The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Recall (ASA24), a freely available Web-based tool, was developed to enhance the feasibility of collecting high-quality dietary intake data from ...large samples.Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the criterion validity of ASA24 through a feeding study in which the true intake for 3 meals was known.Design: True intake and plate waste from 3 meals were ascertained for 81 adults by inconspicuously weighing foods and beverages offered at a buffet before and after each participant served him- or herself. Participants were randomly assigned to complete an ASA24 or an interviewer-administered Automated Multiple-Pass Method (AMPM) recall the following day. With the use of linear and Poisson regression analysis, we examined the associations between recall mode and 1) the proportions of items consumed for which a match was reported and that were excluded, 2) the number of intrusions (items reported but not consumed), and 3) differences between energy, nutrient, food group, and portion size estimates based on true and reported intakes.Results: Respondents completing ASA24 reported 80% of items truly consumed compared with 83% in AMPM (P = 0.07). For both ASA24 and AMPM, additions to or ingredients in multicomponent foods and drinks were more frequently omitted than were main foods or drinks. The number of intrusions was higher in ASA24 (P < 0.01). Little evidence of differences by recall mode was found in the gap between true and reported energy, nutrient, and food group intakes or portion sizes.Conclusions: Although the interviewer-administered AMPM performed somewhat better relative to true intakes for matches, exclusions, and intrusions, ASA24 performed well. Given the substantial cost savings that ASA24 offers, it has the potential to make important contributions to research aimed at describing the diets of populations, assessing the effect of interventions on diet, and elucidating diet and health relations. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00978406.
Update of the Healthy Eating Index: HEI-2010 Guenther, Patricia M., PhD, RD; Casavale, Kellie O., PhD, RD; Reedy, Jill, PhD, RD ...
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics,
04/2013, Letnik:
113, Številka:
4
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Abstract The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a measure of diet quality in terms of conformance with federal dietary guidance. Publication of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans prompted an ...interagency working group to update the HEI. The HEI-2010 retains several features of the 2005 version: (a) it has 12 components, many unchanged, including nine adequacy and three moderation components; (b) it uses a density approach to set standards, eg, per 1,000 calories or as a percentage of calories; and (c) it employs least-restrictive standards; ie, those that are easiest to achieve among recommendations that vary by energy level, sex, and/or age. Changes to the index include: (a) the Greens and Beans component replaces Dark Green and Orange Vegetables and Legumes; (b) Seafood and Plant Proteins has been added to capture specific choices from the protein group; (c) Fatty Acids, a ratio of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated to saturated fatty acids, replaces Oils and Saturated Fat to acknowledge the recommendation to replace saturated fat with monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids; and (d) a moderation component, Refined Grains, replaces the adequacy component, Total Grains, to assess overconsumption. The HEI-2010 captures the key recommendations of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines and, like earlier versions, will be used to assess the diet quality of the US population and subpopulations, evaluate interventions, research dietary patterns, and evaluate various aspects of the food environment.
Increased attention in dietary research and guidance has been focused on dietary patterns, rather than on single nutrients or food groups, because dietary components are consumed in combination and ...correlated with one another. However, the collective body of research on the topic has been hampered by the lack of consistency in methods used. We examined the relationships between 4 indices—the Healthy Eating Index–2010 (HEI-2010), the Alternative Healthy Eating Index–2010 (AHEI-2010), the alternate Mediterranean Diet (aMED), and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH)—and all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and cancer mortality in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study (n = 492,823). Data from a 124-item food-frequency questionnaire were used to calculate scores; adjusted HRs and 95% CIs were estimated. We documented 86,419 deaths, including 23,502 CVD- and 29,415 cancer-specific deaths, during 15 y of follow-up. Higher index scores were associated with a 12–28% decreased risk of all-cause, CVD, and cancer mortality. Specifically, comparing the highest with the lowest quintile scores, adjusted HRs for all-cause mortality for men were as follows: HEI-2010 HR: 0.78 (95% CI: 0.76, 0.80), AHEI-2010 HR: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.78), aMED HR: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.79), and DASH HR: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.85); for women, these were HEI-2010 HR: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.80), AHEI-2010 HR: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.79), aMED HR: 0.76 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.79), and DASH HR: 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.81). Similarly, high adherence on each index was protective for CVD and cancer mortality examined separately. These findings indicate that multiple scores reflect core tenets of a healthy diet that may lower the risk of mortality outcomes, including federal guidance as operationalized in the HEI-2010, Harvard’s Healthy Eating Plate as captured in the AHEI-2010, a Mediterranean diet as adapted in an Americanized aMED, and the DASH Eating Plan as included in the DASH score.
Background
Cancer incidence is higher in men than in women at most shared anatomic sites for currently unknown reasons. The authors quantified the extent to which behaviors (smoking and alcohol use), ...anthropometrics (body mass index and height), lifestyles (physical activity, diet, medications), and medical history collectively explain the male predominance of risk at 21 shared cancer sites.
Methods
Prospective cohort analyses (n = 171,274 male and n = 122,826 female participants; age range, 50–71 years) in the National Institutes of Health‐AARP Diet and Health Study (1995–2011). Cancer‐specific Cox regression models were used to estimate male‐to‐female hazard ratios (HRs). The degree to which risk factors explained the observed male–female risk disparity was quantified using the Peters–Belson method.
Results
There were 26,693 incident cancers (17,951 in men and 8742 in women). Incidence was significantly lower in men than in women only for thyroid and gallbladder cancers. At most other anatomic sites, the risks were higher in men than in women (adjusted HR range, 1.3–10.8), with the strongest increases for bladder cancer (HR, 3.33; 95% confidence interval CI, 2.93–3.79), gastric cardia cancer (HR, 3.49; 95% CI, 2.26–5.37), larynx cancer (HR, 3.53; 95% CI, 2.46–5.06), and esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR, 10.80; 95% CI, 7.33–15.90). Risk factors explained a statistically significant (nonzero) proportion of the observed male excess for esophageal adenocarcinoma and cancers of liver, other biliary tract, bladder, skin, colon, rectum, and lung. However, only a modest proportion of the male excess was explained by risk factors (ranging from 50% for lung cancer to 11% for esophageal adenocarcinoma).
Conclusions
Men have a higher risk of cancer than women at most shared anatomic sites. Such male predominance is largely unexplained by risk factors, underscoring a role for sex‐related biologic factors.
The male predominance of many nonsex‐specific cancers has been explained by differences in exposure prevalence between sexes, but cancer incidence in this study remained significantly higher among men for most sites after a comprehensive adjustment for carcinogenic exposures. These findings suggest a role of sex‐related biologic mechanisms as the major determinants of sex differences in cancer risk.
We examined associations between adherence to the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Cancer Prevention Recommendations using the standardized 2018 ...WCRF/AICR Score and cancer risk among older U.S. adults.
Participants included 215,102 adults in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study followed between 2004 and 2011 (mean 7.0 person-years). Scores (range: 0-7 points) were calculated from self-reported weight, physical activity, and diet and alcohol intake measures. Outcomes included 17 cancers reviewed by WCRF/AICR (cases: male n = 11,066; female n = 8,865) and top three U.S. cancers in males (total n = 4,658; lung n = 2,211; prostate n = 920; colorectal n = 1,527) and females (total n = 5,957; lung n = 1,475; post-menopausal breast n = 3,546; colorectal n = 936). Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for score and cancer risk associations, stratifying by sex and smoking status.
Each one-point score increase was associated with 6% to 13% reduced cancer risk across combined outcomes, except for male never smokers' risk for top three cancers and male current smokers' risk for both combined cancer outcomes. Higher scores were associated with decreased lung cancer risk only among male former smokers (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.89) and female current smokers (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.96). Higher scores were associated with 7% to 19% decreased breast cancer risk across smoking strata and 10% to 14% decreased colorectal cancer risk among male and female never and former smokers.
Greater recommendations adherence was associated with reduced cancer risk.
Findings emphasize the importance of considering combined contributions of multiple lifestyle factors for cancer prevention among older adults and the potential modifying role of smoking history.
To help target preventive strategies, we estimated US population attributable risks (PARs) of demographic and potentially modifiable risk factors for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), ...esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), gastric cardia adenocarcinoma (GCA), and gastric noncardia adenocarcinoma (GNCA).
We prospectively examined the associations for risk factors and these cancers in 490,605 people in the National Institutes of Health-the American Association of Retired Persons Diet and Health cohort Diet and Health Study cohort from 1995 to 2011. Exposures were obtained from the baseline questionnaire. Diagnoses of gastroesophageal reflux disease were extracted for a subset of eligible National Institutes of Health-the American Association of Retired Persons Diet and Health cohort subjects through linkage to Medicare and then multiply imputed for non-Medicare-eligible subjects. Hazard ratios were calculated using multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression. Adjusted population attributable risks were calculated for the US population aged 50-71 years by combining the hazard ratios with the estimated joint distribution of risk factor prevalence from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey.
Smoking remained the most important risk factor for ESCC and was estimated to cause more than 1/3 of EAC and GCA and 1/10 of GNCA. Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease were associated with more than 1/2 of EAC and 1/3 of GCA. Compared with each lowest-risk level category, common risk factors were estimated to be associated with 73.7% of ESCC (95% confidence interval CI: 62.1%-85.4%), 70.3% of EAC (95% CI: 64.4%-76.2%), 69.3% of GCA (95% CI: 61.0%-77.7%), and 33.6% of GNCA (95% CI: 21.7%-45.5%).
These factors accounted for a large proportion of esophageal and gastric cancers in the United States, highlighting opportunities for education and intervention to reduce the burden of these highly fatal cancers.
Evaluation of the Healthy Eating Index-Toddlers-2020 Lerman, Jennifer L.; Herrick, Kirsten A.; Pannucci, TusaRebecca E. ...
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics,
09/2023, Letnik:
123, Številka:
9
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
With the addition of new guidance for children from birth to 24 months in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 (DGA), a Healthy Eating Index (HEI) was developed for toddlers.
To evaluate ...the psychometric properties of the HEI-Toddlers-2020, 5 analyses relevant to construct and concurrent validity and 2 related to reliability were examined.
Twenty-four-hour diet recall data from the cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2011-2018) were used. In addition, exemplary menus were analyzed.
The main analytic sample included toddlers aged 12 through 23 months (n = 838), with additional analyses of toddlers aged 12 through 35 months (n = 1,717) from the United States. Included participants had valid diet recalls and available weight-for-age data.
Outcomes measures included HEI-Toddlers-2020 total and component scores on menus, population distributions, and correlations.
HEI total and component scores were calculated using menus from the American Academy of Pediatrics and Healthy Eating Research. Score means and distributions were estimated using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach with National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (2011-2018). Principal component analysis explored dimensions and Pearson correlations examined components, energy, and Cronbach α. In addition, HEI-Toddlers-2020 and HEI-2020 scores were compared for identical intakes at age 24 months.
For validity, exemplary menus received high scores with the HEI-Toddlers-2020. The mean ± SE total HEI-Toddlers-2020 score for toddlers aged 12 through 23 months was 62.9 ± 0.78 and ranged from 40.1 to 84.4 (1st to 99th percentile). Correlation between diet quality and diet quantity was low (–0.15); the scree plot revealed multiple factors. In addition, total scores for identical intakes were approximately 1.5 points higher for HEI-Toddlers-2020 compared with HEI-2020 (difference range for component scores, –4.97 to 4.89). For reliability, most of the intercorrelations among components were low to moderate (0 to 0.49), with a few exceptions among related components. Cronbach α was .48. These results indicate that the index is multidimensional, with no single component driving the total score, and no unnecessary components that are highly correlated with another component.
The results demonstrated evidence supportive of validity and reliability. The HEI-Toddlers-2020 can be used to assess alignment with the DGA for toddlers.
Background
Prior studies have suggested that gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may be associated with risk of squamous cancers of the larynx and esophagus; however, most of these studies have ...had methodological limitations or insufficient control for potential confounders.
Methods
We prospectively examined the association between GERD and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EADC), esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), and laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) in 490,605 participants of the NIH‐AARP Diet and Health Study cohort who were 50‐71 years of age at baseline. Exposure to risk factors were obtained from the baseline questionnaire. GERD diagnosis was extracted among eligible participants via linkage to Medicare diagnoses codes and then multiply imputed for non–Medicare‐eligible participants. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of GERD were computed using Cox regression.
Results
From 1995 to 2011, we accrued 931 cases of EADC, 876 cases of LSCC, and 301 cases of ESCC in this cohort and estimated multivariable‐adjusted HRs of 2.23 (95% CI, 1.72‐2.90), 1.91 (95% CI, 1.24‐2.94), and 1.99 (95% CI, 1.39‐2.84) for EADC, LSCC, and ESCC, respectively. The associations were independent of sex, smoking status, alcohol intake, and follow‐up time periods. We estimated that among the general population in the United States, 22.04% of people aged 50‐71 years suffered from GERD. Using risk factor distributions for the United States from national survey data, 16.92% of LSCC cases and 17.32% of ESCC cases among individuals aged 50‐71 years were estimated to be associated with GERD.
Conclusion
GERD is a common gastrointestinal disorder, but future prospective studies are needed to replicate our findings. If replicated, they may inform clinical surveillance of GERD patients and suggest new avenues for prevention of these malignancies.
In a prospective cohort of 490,605 patients who were followed for 16 years, patients with a history of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) have a 2‐fold higher risk of laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Moreover, an estimated 17% of these cancer cases were associated with GERD. If replicated by future prospective studies, it may inform clinical surveillance of GERD patients and provide new avenues for prevention of these malignancies.
PDF
