Skip to main content

Table 2 Stepwise approach to examine energy-adjusted zinc as an independent predictor of a new diagnosis of diabetes

From: Is dietary zinc protective for type 2 diabetes? Results from the Australian longitudinal study on women’s health

 

Quintile of energy-adjusted zinc

 

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

P

Number of women

1785

1784

1784

1784

1784

 

Energy-adjusted zinc [median (min, max)]

−1.25 (-4.8, -0.79)

−0.48 (-0.79, -0.23)

0.01 (-0.23, 0.26)

0.50 (0.26, 0.79)

1.24 (0.79, 4.45)

 

Number of diabetics

80

60

59

74

60

 

Odds ratio

      

• Age adjusted

1.00

0.74 (0.53 to 1.05)

0.73 (0.52 to 1.03)

0.99 (0.67 to 1.28)

0.75 (0.53 to 1.05)

0.319

• Age & non-dietary factors adjusted

1.00 1.00

0.82 (0.56 to 1.19)

0.65 (0.44 to 0.96)

0.83 (0.58 to 1.19)

0.56 (0.38 to 0.83)

0.010

• Age, non-dietary and dietary factors adjusted

1.00

0.78 (0.53 to 1.15)

0.60 (0.40 to 0.91)

0.77 (0.52 to 1.13)

0.48 (0.31 to 0.75)

0.004

• Age, non-dietary and dietary factors adjusted plus alcohol intake and use of supplements

 

0.80 (0.54 to 1.17)

0.60 (0.40 to 0.90)

0.78 (0.53 to 1.15)

0.50 (0.32 to 0.77)

0.006

  1. Non-dietary factors were BMI; smoking status; HRT; exercise group; and history of arthritis, CHD, hypertension, asthma and depression.
  2. Dietary factors were energy-adjusted fiber, iron and fat.
  3. Adjustment for family income in the models resulted in a loss of 1300 observations but the p-values for the test for trend were very similar (p = 0.010 for all 3 adjusted models).