Household factors associated with older Australian's purchasing a varied diet: Results from household expenditure data

Living alone and all-cause mortality in community-dwelling adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The non-causal and causal associations, possible age and sex differences between living alone and all-cause mortality among adults were unclear. We aimed to assess the association and causal relation between living alone and all-cause mortality among community-dwelling adults, addressing the certainty of evidence, possible age and sex differences.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, and APA PsycINFO for cohort studies examining the association between living alone and all-cause mortality on November 19, 2021. We used the GRADE approach to assess certainty of evidence, and the Instrument for the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN) to evaluate credibility of subgroup inferences and conducted a meta-analysis of measures of association between living alone and mortality. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021290895.

Findings

18 cohort studies with 62,174 adults proved eligible. Living alone was associated with mortality (relative risk (RR) = 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.23). Both age and sex modified the association (high and moderate credibility, separately). Living alone increased the risk of dying only in younger but not older individuals (ratio of RRs = 1.59, interaction P = 0.003; younger RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17-1.71, high certainty for prognosis, low for causation; older RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.91-1.22, moderate certainty for prognosis, very low for causation). Living alone increased risk to a greater extent in males than females (ratio of RRs = 1.39, 95% CI 1.14-1.70; interaction P = 0.001, males RR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.17-1.71, high certainty for prognosis, low for causation; females RR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.99-1.33; moderate for prognosis factor, very low for causation).

Interpretation

Living alone is associated with increased mortality in individuals under 65 years (high certainty) but not with those over 75 years; the association may be causal (low certainty). Associations, and possibly effects, may be stronger in men than women.

Funding

None.

A Comparison of Diet Quality in a Sample of Rural and Urban Australian Adults

The diet quality of rural Australians is under researched. Characterising disparities in diet quality between rural and urban populations may inform targeted interventions in at- risk groups. A cross-sectional study aimed to determine the relationship between diet quality, rurality and sociodemographic characteristics in a sample of Australian adults. Participants were recruited at rural and regional events between 2017 and 2020, in New South Wales, Australia. Diet quality was measured using the Healthy Eating Quiz or Australian Eating Survey to generate an Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS). ARFS was compared by rurality and sociodemographic characteristics using multivariate regression. Participants (n = 247; 53% female) had a mean ± SD ARFS of 34.5 ± 9.0. There was no significant effect of rurality on ARFS (β-coefficient = −0.4; 95%CI −3.0, 2.3). Compared to participants aged 18–30 years, higher ARFS was evident for those aged 31–50 (β = 5.4; 95%CI 0.3, 10.4), 51–70 (β = 4.4; 95%CI 0.3, 8.5) and >71 years (β = 6.5; 95% CI 1.6–11.4). Compared to those living alone, participants living with a partner (β = 5.2; 95%CI 2.0, 8.4) and families with children (β = 5.6; 95%CI 1.4, 9.8) had significantly higher ARFS. ARFS was significantly lower with each additional self-reported chronic health condition (β = −1.4; 95%CI −2.3, −0.4). Our results indicate that diet quality as defined by the ARFS was classified as ‘getting there’ and that age, living arrangements and chronic health conditions, but not rurality, influenced diet quality in a sample of Australian adults.

Dietary Diversity, Diet Cost, and Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes in the United Kingdom: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Diet is a key modifiable risk factor for multiple chronic conditions, including type 2 diabetes (T2D). Consuming a range of foods from the five major food groups is advocated as critical to healthy eating, but the association of diversity across major food groups with T2D is not clear and the relationship of within-food-group diversity is unknown. In addition, there is a growing price gap between more and less healthy foods, which may limit the uptake of varied diets. The current study had two aims: first, to examine the association of reported diversity of intake of food groups as well as their subtypes with risk of developing T2D, and second, to estimate the monetary cost associated with dietary diversity.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A prospective study of 23,238 participants in the population-based EPIC-Norfolk cohort completed a baseline Food Frequency Questionnaire in 1993-1997 and were followed up for a median of 10 y. We derived a total diet diversity score and additional scores for diversity within each food group (dairy products, fruits, vegetables, meat and alternatives, and grains). We used multivariable Cox regression analyses for incident diabetes (892 new cases), and multivariable linear regression for diet cost. Greater total diet diversity was associated with 30% lower risk of developing T2D (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.70 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.95]) comparing diets comprising all five food groups to those with three or fewer, adjusting for confounders including obesity and socioeconomic status. In analyses of diversity within each food group, greater diversity in dairy products (HR 0.61 [0.45 to 0.81]), fruits (HR 0.69 [0.52 to 0.90]), and vegetables (HR 0.67 [0.52 to 0.87]) were each associated with lower incident diabetes. The cost of consuming a diet covering all 5 food groups was 18% higher (£4.15/day [4.14 to 4.16]) than one comprising three or fewer groups. Key limitations are the self-reported dietary data and the binary scoring approach whereby some food groups contained both healthy and less healthy food items.

CONCLUSIONS

A diet characterized by regular consumption of all five food groups and by greater variety of dairy, fruit, and vegetable subtypes, appears important for a reduced risk of diabetes. However, such a diet is more expensive. Public health efforts to prevent diabetes should include food price policies to promote healthier, more varied diets.

Variety more than quantity of fruit and vegetable intake varies by socioeconomic status and financial hardship. Findings from older adults in the EPIC cohort

BACKGROUND

Beyond quantity, variety of fruit and vegetable (FV) intake prevents chronic conditions and is widely recommended as critical to healthful eating. FV consumption is socially patterned, especially for women, but little is known about multiple economic determinants of variety or whether they differ from those of quantity.

OBJECTIVE

To examine socioeconomic status and financial hardships in relation to variety and quantity of FV intakes among older British women and men.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of 9580 adults (50-79 years) in the nationally representative EPIC cohort who responded to a postal Health and Life Experiences Questionnaire (1996-2000) and Food Frequency Questionnaire (1998-2002). Variety counted unique items consumed (items/month) and quantity measured total intake (g/day).

RESULTS

No consistent differences by any economic factor were observed for quantity of fruits or vegetables, except education in men. Lower education, lower social class and renting were independently associated with lower fruit variety and vegetable variety (p-trend < 0.001), with differences stronger in men. Mean vegetable variety differed between top and bottom social classes by 2.9 items/month for men and 2.5 for women. Greater financial hardships were also independently associated with lower variety, with differences stronger in women for fruits and in men for vegetables.

CONCLUSIONS

British older adults reporting greater economic disadvantage consistently consumed fewer different fruits or vegetables, but not lower amounts. Further nutrition studies of the protective effects, and underlying mechanisms, of FV variety are warranted for addressing social inequalities in older adults' diet quality. Dietary guidance should separately emphasise variety, and interventions should aim to address financial barriers to older adults' consumption of diverse FV.