Inserm, Cohortes Epidémiologiques en Population, UMS 011, 94800 Villejuif, France.
Faculté de Santé, Université de Paris, UFR de Médecine, 75006 Paris, France.
Nutrients. 2020 Sep 4;12(9):2700. doi: 10.3390/nu12092700.
Cross-sectional results have suggested a linear association between the number of dietary exclusions and depressive symptoms. This longitudinal study aimed to examine the direction of this association. : In the population-based Constances cohort, depressive symptoms were defined by a score ≥19 on the Centre of Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale. Diet was measured with a 24-item qualitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Both variables were available at inclusion (from 2012 to 2014) and on follow-up (2015 for the CES-D and 2017 for diet). Food exclusion was categorized into five different groups: No exclusion, exclusion of one, two, three, or ≥4 food groups according to the self-reported number of food groups rarely or never consumed. Logistic regressions were conducted, either taking depressive symptoms as the outcome on follow-up with dietary exclusions at baseline as predictor or with the opposite, adjusting for age, sex, education, income, alcohol intake, smoking, physical activity, and anemia. The path analysis included outcomes and covariates in one model. : The median follow-up was three years. A total of 29,337 participants (53.4% women, 48.15 ± 12.9 y.o.) had complete CES-D data and 25,356 (53.56% women, 49.05 ± 12.8 y.o.) FFQ data. Dietary exclusion at inclusion predicted depressive symptoms at follow-up (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 2.35 [1.62-3.40] for ≥4 excluded items compared to no exclusions). Depressive symptoms at inclusion predicted dietary exclusions at follow-up (3.45 [1.93-6.16] for ≥4 excluded items). In the path analysis, the standardized estimate of the association between dietary exclusions at inclusion and depressive symptoms at follow-up was by far higher than the opposite (0.1863 and 0.00189, respectively, both < 0.05). : The association of dietary exclusion with subsequent depression is stronger than the opposite association.
横断面研究结果表明,饮食限制的数量与抑郁症状之间存在线性关联。本纵向研究旨在探讨这种关联的方向。在基于人群的 Constances 队列研究中,抑郁症状通过中心流行病学研究抑郁量表(CES-D)得分≥19 来定义。饮食通过 24 项定性食物频率问卷(FFQ)进行测量。这两个变量在纳入时(2012 年至 2014 年)和随访时(CES-D 为 2015 年,饮食为 2017 年)均可用。食物排除分为五类:根据很少或从不食用的食物组数量,自我报告无排除、排除 1 种、2 种、3 种或≥4 种食物组。进行逻辑回归,要么将抑郁症状作为随访时的结果,以基线时的饮食排除为预测因素,要么相反,调整年龄、性别、教育、收入、酒精摄入、吸烟、体育活动和贫血。路径分析在一个模型中包含了结果和协变量。中位随访时间为 3 年。共有 29337 名参与者(53.4%为女性,48.15±12.9 岁)完成了 CES-D 数据,25356 名参与者(53.56%为女性,49.05±12.8 岁)完成了 FFQ 数据。纳入时的饮食排除预测了随访时的抑郁症状(与无排除相比,≥4 种排除的项目的比值比[95%置信区间]:2.35[1.62-3.40])。纳入时的抑郁症状预测了随访时的饮食排除(与无排除相比,≥4 种排除的项目的比值比:3.45[1.93-6.16])。在路径分析中,纳入时饮食排除与随访时抑郁症状之间的关联的标准化估计值远远高于相反的关联(分别为 0.1863 和 0.00189,均<0.05)。与相反的关联相比,饮食排除与随后发生的抑郁之间的关联更强。