Skip to main content

Table 3 Beta coefficients (β) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of HOMA-TyG index associated with each score increase in DP1

From: Mediating effect of TyG index on the association between glucose-lipid metabolism-related dietary pattern and T2DM: a propensity score-matched analysis

β (95% confidence interval)

Quartile 1 (Reference, n = 332)

Quartile 2 (n = 331)

Quartile 3 (n = 331)

Quartile 4 (n = 332)

P for Trend §

PCA-derived DP 1

HOMA-%β

    

Crude model (Model 1) 1.00

-7.19 (-19, 5.0)

2.27 (-9.9, 14)

0.46 (-12, 13)

0.582

Model 2 1.00

-6.04 (-18, 5.9)

2.13 (-10.0, 14)

2.80 (-9.5, 15)

0.760

Model 3 1.00

-4.03 (-16, 7.7)

3.62 (-8.2, 15)

4.49 (-7.5, 16)

0.947

HOMA-IR

    

Crude model (Model 1) 1.00

0.01 (-0.07, 0.14)

0.67 (0.39, 1.70)

0.83 (0.01, 0.21)

0.066

Model 2 1.00

0.11 (-1.0, 1.2)

0.98 (-0.12, 2.10)

1.19 (0.08, 2.30) *

0.017

Model 3 1.00

0.07 (-1.0, 1.2)

0.91 (-0.18, 2.00)

1.23(0.12, 2.30) *

0.006

TyG index

    

Crude model (Model 1) 1.00

-0.03 (-0.07, -0.14)

0.11 (0.01, 0.21) *

0.11 (0.01, 0.20) *

0.011

Model 2 1.00

0.04 (-0.06, 0.15)

0.13 (0.03, 0.24) *

0.13 (0.03, 0.24) *

0.005

Model 3 1.00

0.02 (-0.06, 0.09)

0.09 (0.01, 0.17) *

0.13 (0.04, 0.21) **

< 0.001

RRR-derived DP 1

HOMA-%β

    

Crude model (Model 1) 1.00

-5.33 (-18, 6.9)

-6.1 (-17, 4.7)

-7.74 (-20, 4.5)

0.222

Model 2 1.00

-1.50 (-30, 10)

-3.2 (-14, 7.4)

-1.91 (-14, 10)

0.176

Model 3 1.00

-0.62 (-29, 9.6)

-2.6 (-13, 7.8)

-2.17 (-14, 9.7)

0.154

HOMA-IR

    

Crude model (Model 1) 1.00

-0.26 (-1.3, 0.81)

0.38 (-0.68, 1.40)

0.97 (-0.10, 2.0)

0.109

Model 2 1.00

-0.01 (-1.0, 1.1)

0.65 (-0.44, 1.70)

1.26 (0.16, 2.4) *

0.006

Model 3 1.00

0.04 (-1.0, 1.1)

0.54 (-0.54, 1.60)

1.08 (0.02, 2.2) *

0.027

TyG index

    

Crude model (Model 1) 1.00

0.07 (-0.03, 0.17)

0.16 (0.02, 0.20)

0.21 (0.11, 0.31) *

< 0.001

Model 2 1.00

0.09 (-0.02, 0.19)

0.17 (0.07, 0.28) *

0.22 (0.12, 0.32) ***

< 0.001

Model 3 1.00

0.06 (-0.02, 0.14)

0.11 (0.03, 0.19) *

0.14 (0.06, 0.22) ***

0.002

  1. §: Trends were examined using the Cochran-Armitage trend test; *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
  2. PCA-derived DP 1, principal component analysis-derived dietary pattern 1. RRR-derived DP 1, reduced rank regression-derived dietary pattern 1. Model 1: Unadjusted model. Model 2: Includes adjustment of age, gender, household income, education, occupation, physical exercise, drinking, smoking. Model 3: Includes adjustment of age, gender, household income, education, occupation, physical exercise, drinking, smoking, family history of diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome. TyG index, triglyceride-glucose index; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; HOMA-%β, homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function. The β and 95% confidence interval were obtained using generalized linear models. P for trend values for the medians of each quartile of scores included in the multiple generalized linear regression models
Back to article page

BMC Endocrine Disorders

ISSN: 1472-6823

Contact us