Deakin University, IMPACT (the Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation), Food & Mood Centre, School of Medicine, Barwon Health, Geelong, Australia.
Deakin University, IMPACT (the Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation), Food & Mood Centre, School of Medicine, Barwon Health, Geelong, Australia.
J Affect Disord. 2023 Aug 15;335:57-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.04.124. Epub 2023 May 4.
Few studies have tested longitudinal associations between ultra-processed food consumption and depressive outcomes. As such, further investigation and replication are necessary. The aim of this study is to examine associations of ultra-processed food intake with elevated psychological distress as an indicator of depression after 15 years.
Data from the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS) were analysed (n = 23,299). We applied the NOVA food classification system to a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) to determine ultra-processed food intake at baseline. We categorised energy-adjusted ultra-processed food consumption into quartiles by using the distribution of the dataset. Psychological distress was measured by the ten-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). We fitted unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models to assess the association of ultra-processed food consumption (exposure) with elevated psychological distress (outcome and defined as K10 ≥ 20). We fitted additional logistic regression models to determine whether these associations were modified by sex, age and body mass index.
After adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and lifestyle and health-related behaviours, participants with the highest relative intake of ultra-processed food were at increased odds of elevated psychological distress compared to participants with the lowest intake (aOR: 1.23; 95%CI: 1.10, 1.38, p for trend = 0.001). We found no evidence for an interaction of sex, age and body mass index with ultra-processed food intake.
Higher ultra-processed food intake at baseline was associated with subsequent elevated psychological distress as an indicator of depression at follow-up. Further prospective and intervention studies are necessary to identify possible underlying pathways, specify the precise attributes of ultra-processed food that confer harm, and optimise nutrition-related and public health strategies for common mental disorders.
很少有研究检验超加工食品消费与抑郁结果之间的纵向关联。因此，有必要进一步进行调查和复制。本研究旨在检验 15 年后超加工食品摄入量与心理困扰升高（作为抑郁的指标）之间的关联。
对墨尔本协作队列研究（MCCS）的数据进行了分析（n=23299）。我们应用 NOVA 食品分类系统对食物频率问卷（FFQ）进行了分析，以确定基线时的超加工食品摄入量。我们通过数据集的分布将能量调整后的超加工食品摄入量分为四等份。心理困扰通过 Kessler 心理困扰量表（K10）的十个项目进行衡量。我们拟合了未调整和调整后的逻辑回归模型，以评估超加工食品消费（暴露）与心理困扰升高（结局，定义为 K10≥20）之间的关联。我们拟合了额外的逻辑回归模型，以确定这些关联是否受到性别、年龄和体重指数的影响。
在调整了社会人口统计学特征、生活方式和与健康相关的行为后，与最低摄入量相比，超加工食品摄入量最高的参与者发生心理困扰升高的可能性更高（比值比：1.23；95%置信区间：1.10，1.38，p 趋势=0.001）。我们没有发现性别、年龄和体重指数与超加工食品摄入之间存在交互作用的证据。
基线时超加工食品摄入量较高与随后的心理困扰升高（作为随访时抑郁的指标）相关。需要进一步进行前瞻性和干预性研究，以确定可能的潜在途径，确定导致危害的超加工食品的确切属性，并优化针对常见精神障碍的营养和公共卫生策略。
