These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Ultra-processed food consumption patterns among older adults in the Netherlands and the role of the food environment.
    Author: Pinho MGM, Lakerveld J, Harbers MC, Sluijs I, Vermeulen R, Huss A, Boer JMA, Verschuren WMM, Brug J, Beulens JWJ, Mackenbach JD.
    Journal: Eur J Nutr; 2021 Aug; 60(5):2567-2580. PubMed ID: 33236180.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To describe the patterns of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) consumption in the Netherlands; to test if exposure to the food environment is associated with UPFs consumption; and if this association differed across educational levels and neighbourhood urbanisation. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using 2015-data of 8104 older adults from the Dutch EPIC cohort. Proportion of UPFs consumption was calculated from a validated food-frequency questionnaire. Exposure to the food environment was defined as proximity and availability of supermarkets, fast-food restaurants, full-service restaurants, convenience stores, candy stores and cafés. Consumption of UPFs was expressed as both percentage of total grams and total kilocalories. RESULTS: The study population was aged 70(± 10 SD) years and 80.5% was female. Average UPFs consumption was 17.8% of total food intake in grams and 37% of total energy intake. Those who consumed greater amounts of UPFs had a poorer overall diet quality. Adjusted linear regression models showed that closer proximity and larger availability to any type of food retailer was associated with lower UPFs consumption (both in grams and kilocalories). Somewhat stronger significant associations were found for proximity to restaurants (β = - 1.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = - 2.6; - 0.6), and supermarkets (β = - 2.2%, 95%CI = - 3.3; - 1.1); i.e., Individuals living within 500 m from the closest supermarket, as compared to 1500 m, had 2.6% less calories from UPFs. No differences were found on analyses stratified for urbanisation and education. CONCLUSIONS: Using various measures of exposure to the food environment, we found that exposure to restaurants and supermarkets was associated with somewhat lower consumption of UPFs.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]