Dietary patterns and their association with food and nutrient intake in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)–Potsdam study
Open accessAbstract
Dietary pattern analysis has recently received growing attention, as it might be more appropriate in studies of diet-disease associations than the single food or nutrient approach that has dominated past epidemiological research. Factor analysis is a technique which is commonly used to identify dietary patterns within study populations. However, the ability of factor solutions to account for variance of food and nutrient intake has so far remained unclear. The present study therefore explored the statistical properties of dietary patterns with regard to the explained variance. Food intake of 8975 men and 13 379 women, assessed by a food-frequency questionnaire, was aggregated into forty-seven separate food groups. Dietary patterns were identified by principal component analysis and subsequent varimax rotation. Seven factors were retained for both men and women, which accounted for about 31 % of the total variance. The explained variance was relatively high (>40 %) for cooked vegetables, sauce, meat, dessert, cake, bread other than wholemeal, raw vegetables, processed meat, high-fat cheese, butter and margarine. Factor scores were used to investigate associations between the factors and nutrient intake. The patterns accounted for relatively large proportions of variance of energy and macronutrient intake, but for less variance of alcohol and micronutrient intake, especially of retinol, beta-carotene, vitamin E, Ca and ascorbic acid. In addition, factors were related to age, BMI, physical activity, education, smoking and vitamin and mineral supplement use.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Potential confounders were a priori selected based on the literature on red meat intake and diabetes risk and prior investigations in EPIC-Potsdam.
“Potential confounders to be included as covariates were a priori selected based on the literature on the association between red meat intake and diabetes risk (2, 3) and prior investigations in EPIC-Potsdam regarding risk factors of type 2 diabetes (5), dietary patterns (27), and determinants of metabolic profiles (28,29).”
From Amino acids, lipid metabolites, and ferritin as potential mediators linking red meat consumption to type 2 diabetes (2015) · cites this paper as [27]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 198
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Bohlscheid-Thomas S, Hoting I, Boeing H & Wahrendorf J (1997b) Reproducibility and relative validity of food energy and macronutrient intake of a food frequency questionnaire developed for the German part of the EPIC project. Interna- tional Journal of Epidemiology 26, Suppl. 1, S71±S81. Federal Institute for Health Protection of Consumers and Veterinary Medicine (1998) The German Food Code and Nutrient Database, BLS 2.1. Berlin: BgVV-Journal 2.
- Authors
- Schulze, M. B., Hoffmann, K., Kroke, A., & Boeing, H.
- Affiliations
- German Institute of Human Nutrition (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Schulze, Matthias B.
- Venue
- British Journal Of Nutrition
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2001-03
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 363-373
- ISSN
- 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-2662
- OpenAlex
- W1989715709
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 8.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Deutsche Krebshilfe (70–2488-Ha I, 70-2488-Ha, SOC 95 201408 05F02)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Keywords
- dietary habits, explained variance, dietary intake, nutrient intake, factor analysis, principal component analysis, varimax rotation, cooked vegetables, meat consumption, processed meat, dairy products, energy intake, macronutrient intake, micronutrient intake, alcohol consumption, EPIC-Potsdam cohort, diet-disease association
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Energy Intake, Diet, Diet Surveys, Europe, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Feeding Behavior, Female, Food, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review