Abstract
Background One approach to test for differential associations between plant foods with health uses a scoring approach: foods categorized into animal or ‘healthy’ plant-based or ‘unhealthy’ plant-based groups to construct a plant-based diet index (PDI), healthy PDI (hPDI), and unhealthy PDI (uPDI).
Objective To evaluate robustness of associations between diet indices and incident coronary heart disease (CHD) risk when recategorizing food groups in indices.
Methods Using REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) data, we replicated a published use of the scoring approach. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we assessed ramifications of the following on associations between diet indices and CHD risk: 1) reconfiguring foods within and among food groups, using potatoes as an example, 2) leave-one-out analysis for each of 12 plant-based food groups, and 3) agnostically redefining each food group as ‘healthy’ or ‘unhealthy’.
Results Over 153,286 person-years of follow-up, there were 868 cases of CHD. Replication analyses did not reach statistical significance. General patterns of magnitude of hazard ratios (HRs) in replication and reconfiguration models were PDI HRs < hPDI HRs < uPDI HRs for women, and hPDI < PDI < uPDI for men. Five models reconfiguring potatoes resulted in small, varied differences in PDI, hPDI, and uPDI associations. Leave-one-out analyses resulted in greater variation of associations between indices and CHD. In agnostic models, each plant-based food group was classified in indices as ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’ with statistically significant beneficial or deleterious associations with CHD. Averaged over 4,096 models, HRs’ shifts were small when food groups were moved between ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’.
Conclusion Statistically significant associations between hPDI, uPDI, and PDI and incident CHD were not replicated. Small perturbations of the scoring approach had varied impacts on HRs. Agnostically constructing diet indices demonstrated the potential for guilt (or benefit) by association: any of the food groups we studied could be categorized with others in an index showing beneficial or deleterious associations.
Competing Interest Statement
In the 36 months prior to the initial submission, DBA has received personal payments or promises for same from: Amin Talati Wasserman for KSF Acquisition Corp (Glanbia); General Mills; Kaleido Biosciences; Law Offices of Ronald Marron; Medpace/Gelesis; Novo Nordisk Foundation; and Zero Longevity Science (as stock options). Donations to a foundation have been made on his behalf by the Northarvest Bean Growers Association. DBA's institution, Indiana University, and the Indiana University Foundation have received funds or donations to support his research or educational activities from: Alliance for Potato Research and Education; American Egg Board; Arnold Ventures; Eli Lilly and Company; Mars, Inc.; National Cattlemen's Beef Association; National Pork Board; Pfizer, Inc.; USDA; WW (formerly Weight Watchers); and numerous other for-profit and non-profit organizations to support the work of the School of Public Health and the university more broadly. AWB has received travel expenses from Alliance for Potato Research and Education, International Food Information Council, International Food Information Council Foundation, and Soy Nutrition Institute Global; speaking honoraria from Alliance for Potato Research and Education, American Society for Nutrition, Calorie Control Council, Eastern North American Region of the International Biometric Society, International Food Information Council Foundation, Potatoes USA, Purchaser Business Group on Health, The Obesity Society, and University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences; consulting payments from National Cattlemen's Beef Association, and Soy Nutrition Institute Global; and grants through his institution from Alliance for Potato Research & Education, American Egg Board, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, NIH/NHLBI, NIH/NIDDK, NIH/NIGMS, and NSF. He has been involved in research for which his institution or colleagues have received grants or contracts from Alliance for Potato Research & Education, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Hass Avocado Board, NIH/NCATS, NIH/NCI, NIH/NIA, NIH/NIGMS, and NIH/NLM. His wife is employed by Reckitt. BH has been involved in research for which her institution, Indiana University, has received grants from NIH; WW International, Inc., the National Pork Board, the California Walnut Commission, the Alliance of Potato Research & Education, and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. YJ-N has received honoraria from The Alliance for Potato Research and Education. JMS reports no disclosures.
Funding Statement
The present analysis is supported by the Alliance for Potato Research & Education. The funder did not have any role in design and conduct of the analyses; interpretation of the results; preparation of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Protocol of the current analysis was approved by Indiana University Institutional Review Board, IRB#16198.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Researchers who wish to reproduce our analyses can submit a project proposal to the REGARDS team (https://www.uab.edu/soph/regardsstudy/). We did not have any access privilege that others would not have. The analytic code is publicly available at https://osf.io/c3b4z/.
Abbreviations
- BMI
- Body mass index
- CHD
- Coronary heart disease
- CI
- Confidence interval
- ECG
- Electrocardiogram
- hPDI
- Healthful plant-based diet index
- HPFS
- Health Professionals Follow-Up Study
- HR
- Hazard ratio
- MI
- Myocardial infarction
- NHS
- Nurses’ Health Study
- NHS2
- Nurses’ Health Study 2
- PDI
- Plant-based diet index
- REGARDS
- REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke
- uPDI
- Unhealthful plant-based diet index
