Dataset Information

Does diet quality matter? A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT: This secondary analysis assessed the association of a plant-based index (PDI), healthful (hPDI), and unhealthful (uPDI), with weight loss in overweight adults. Participants (n = 244) were randomly assigned to a vegan (n = 122) or control group (n = 122) for 16 weeks. Three-day dietary records were analyzed and PDI indices were calculated. A repeated measure ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. All three scores increased in the vegan group; the effect sizes were: PDI +10.6 (95% CI +8.6 to +12.6; p < 0.001); hPDI +10.9 (95% CI +8.4 to +13.4; p < 0.001); and uPDI +5.4 (95% CI +3.4 to +7.4; p < 0.001). The change in all three scores significantly correlated with change in body weight: PDI (r = -0.40; p < 0.001); hPDI (r = -0.37; p < 0.001); and uPDI (r = -0.21; p = 0.002). These findings suggest that minimizing the consumption of animal products and oil may be an effective weight loss strategy in overweight adults. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02939638.

SUBMITTER: Kahleova H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10927534 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does diet quality matter? A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

Kahleova Hana H Brennan Haley H Znayenko-Miller Tatiana T Holubkov Richard R Barnard Neal D ND

European journal of clinical nutrition 20231128 3

This secondary analysis assessed the association of a plant-based index (PDI), healthful (hPDI), and unhealthful (uPDI), with weight loss in overweight adults. Participants (n = 244) were randomly assigned to a vegan (n = 122) or control group (n = 122) for 16 weeks. Three-day dietary records were analyzed and PDI indices were calculated. A repeated measure ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. All three scores increased in the vegan group; the effect sizes were: PDI +10.6 (95% CI +8.6 to +12 ...[more]

PMID: 38012413

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe DIETFITS trial reported no significant difference in 12-month weight loss between a healthy low-fat and healthy low-carbohydrate diet. Participants were instructed to restrict fat or carbohydrates to levels consistent with a ketogenic or ultra low-fat diet for 2 months and to subsequently increase intakes until they achieved a comfortable maintenance level.ObjectiveTo compare 3- and 12-month changes in body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors between a subsample of participants who reported 3-month fat or carbohydrates intakes consistent with either a ketogenic-like diet (KLD) or ultra low-fat diet (ULF).Design3-month and 12-month weight and risk factor outcomes were compared between KLD (n = 18) and ULF (n = 21) sub-groups of DIETFITS participants (selected from n = 609, healthy overweight/obese, aged 18-50 years).ResultsLess than 10% of DIETFITS participants met KLD or ULF criteria at 3-months. Both groups achieved similar weight loss and insulin resistance improvements at 3-months and maintained them at 12- months. Significant differences at 3-months included a transient ~12% increase in LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) for KLD with a concomitant greater reduction in log(TG/HDL), a measure of LDL-C's atherogenic potential. The latter was maintained at 12-months, despite substantial diet recidivism for both groups, whereas LDL-C levels were similar for ULF at baseline and 12-months. KLD participants achieved and maintained the greatest reductions in added sugars and refined grains at 3- months and 12-months, whereas ULF participants reported a 50% increase in refined grains intake from baseline to 12-months.ConclusionAmong the ~10% of study participants that achieved the most extreme restriction of dietary fat vs. carbohydrate after 3 months, weight loss and improvement in insulin sensitivity were substantial and similar between groups. At 12 months, after considerable dietary recidivism, the few significant differences in diet quality and blood lipid parameters tended to favor KLD over ULF.

Project description:ImportanceThe universal call to action for healthier and more sustainable dietary choices is the framework of the United Nations's Sustainable Development Goals. The Atlantic diet, originating from the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula, represents an example of a traditional diet that aligns with these principles.ObjectiveTo explore a 6-month intervention based on the Atlantic diet's effects on metabolic and environmental health, assessing metabolic syndrome (MetS) incidence and the carbon footprint.Design, setting, and participantsThe Galician Atlantic Diet study was a 6-month randomized clinical trial designed to assess the effects of this regional traditional diet on families' eating habits. The study was conducted from March 3, 2014, to May 29, 2015, at a local primary health care center in the rural town of A Estrada in northwestern Spain and involved a multisectoral collaboration. Families were randomly selected from National Health System records and randomized 1:1 to an intervention or control group. This secondary analysis of the trial findings was performed between March 24, 2021, and November 7, 2023.InterventionsOver 6 months, families in the intervention group received educational sessions, cooking classes, written supporting material, and foods characteristic of the Atlantic diet, whereas those randomized to the control group continued with their habitual lifestyle.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were MetS incidence, defined per National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines, and carbon footprint emissions as an environmental metric using life cycle assessment with daily dietary intake as the functional unit.ResultsInitially, 250 families were randomized (574 participants; mean [SD] age, 46.8 [15.7] years; 231 males [40.2%] and 343 females [59.8%]). The intervention group included 126 families (287 participants) and the control group, 124 families (287 participants). Ultimately, 231 families completed the trial. The intervention significantly reduced the risk of incident cases of MetS (rate ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.79) and had fewer MetS components (proportional odds ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.42-0.82) compared with the control condition. The intervention group did not have a significantly reduced environmental impact in terms of carbon footprint emissions compared with the control group (-0.17 [95% CI, -0.46 to 0.12] kg CO2 equivalents/person/d).Conclusions and relevanceThese findings provide important evidence that a family-focused dietary intervention based on a traditional diet can reduce the risk of incident MetS. Further research is needed to understand the underlying mechanisms and determine the generalizability to other populations, taking into account regional cultural and dietary variations.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02391701.

Dataset Information

Does diet quality matter? A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

Publications

Does diet quality matter? A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets