Cited by 180Nutritional Studies and DietDietary Effects on HealthNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Eating patterns and type 2 diabetes risk in older women: breakfast consumption and eating frequency

Open access
Mekary, Rania A, Giovannucci, Edward, Cahill, Leah, Willett, Walter C, van Dam, Rob M, Hu, Frank B·2013·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Little is known about the association between eating patterns and type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk in women. Objective The objective was to examine prospectively associations between regular breakfast consumption, eating frequency, and T2D risk in women. Design Eating pattern was assessed in 2002 in a cohort of 46,289 US women in the Nurses' Health Study who were free of T2D, cardiovascular disease, or cancer and were followed for 6 y. We used Cox proportional hazards analysis to evaluate associations with incident T2D. Results We documented 1560 T2D cases during follow-up. After adjustment for known risk factors for T2D-except for body mass index (BMI), a potential mediator-women who consumed breakfast irregularly (0-6 times/wk) were at higher risk of T2D than were women who consumed breakfast daily (RR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.44). This association was moderately attenuated after adjustment for BMI (RR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.35). In comparison with women who ate 3 times/d, the RRs were 1.09 (0.84, 1.41) for women who ate 1-2 times/d, 1.13 (1.00, 1.27) for women who ate 4-5 times/d, and 0.99 (0.81, 1.21) for women who ate ≥6 times/d. Among irregular breakfast consumers, women with a higher eating frequency (≥4 times/d) had a significantly greater T2D risk (RR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.23, 1.75) than did women who consumed breakfast daily and ate 1-3 times/d. Adjustment for BMI attenuated this association (RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.48). Conclusion Irregular breakfast consumption was associated with a higher T2D risk in women, which was partially but not entirely mediated by BMI.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3945/ajcn.112.057521

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The most common measure used to assess overall diet quality was a previously validated and reliability tested a priori diet quality index reflecting adherence to dietary guidelines for the country of the sample population.

    “The most common measure used to assess overall diet quality was a previously validated and reliability tested a priori diet quality index which reflects an individual's adherence to the dietary guidelines for the country of the sample population (for example, the Healthy Eating Index (HEI), the Alternative HEI (AHEI) and the Dietary Guidelines Index (DGI))( 23 , 28 , 86 , 88 – 90 , 92 , 94 ).”
  • Of the nine studies identified that examined associations between skipping breakfast and diet quality, six found a negative association and three found no association.

    “Of the nine studies identified that examined associations between skipping breakfast and diet quality, six found a negative association( 22 , 23 , 86 , 87 , 90 , 94 ) and three found no association( 28 , 91 , 93 ).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mekary, R. A., Giovannucci, E., Cahill, L., Willett, W. C., van Dam, R. M., & Hu, F. B.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-08
Volume
98
Issue
2
Pages
436-443
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2143532320
Cited by
180
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 3
FWCI
16.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA095589, CA95589, CA-55075)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK058845, P30DK046200, P30 DK-46200, DK58845)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Dietary Effects on Health
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, breakfast consumption, meal frequency, dietary habits, older women, body mass index, Nurses' Health Study, diabetes risk
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Dietary Fiber, Feeding Behavior, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Nutrition Assessment, Body Mass Index, Proportional Hazards Models, Breakfast

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