Table 3– Relationship between “prudent” dietary pattern and forced vital capacity (FVC) in males and females
SubjectsFVC LPartially adjusted# coefficientFully adjusted coefficient
Males
 Prudent diet score
  1 (lowest fifth)4703.92±0.72
  23594.01±0.750.04 (-0.05–0.13)0.05 (-0.04–0.14)
  3 (middle fifth)2654.13±0.720.11 (0.01–0.21)0.09 (-0.01–0.20)
  42584.09±0.730.08 (-0.02–0.17)0.07 (-0.04–0.18)
  5 (highest fifth)1964.21±0.710.16 (0.05–0.26)0.12 (0.00–0.24)
 Fifths of prudent diet score as a trend0.04 (0.01–0.06) p = 0.0030.03 (0.00–0.05) p = 0.044
Females
 Prudent diet score
  1 (lowest fifth)1182.61±0.46
  22272.64±0.500.00 (-0.10–0.09)0.03 (-0.07–0.12)
  3 (middle fifth)3222.64±0.51-0.12 (-0.10–0.08)0.01 (-0.08–0.11)
  43302.71±0.500.06 (-0.03–0.15)0.05 (-0.04–0.15)
  5 (highest fifth)3912.83±0.490.13 (0.04–0.22)0.10 (0.01–0.19)
 Fifths of prudent diet score as a trend0.04 (0.02–0.06) p<0.0010.03 (0.01–0.04) p = 0.007
  • Data are presented as n, mean±sd or regression coefficient (95% CI), unless otherwise stated. #: for age, height, smoking status and pack-years; : for age, height, smoking status, pack-years, smoke in home, age left education, home ownership status, number of rooms, number of cars, social class, fat mass, activity score, energy intake, alcohol, dietary supplement use, birth weight, father's social class at birth, inhaled or oral steroids use, paracetamol use.