Lifestyles patterns and weight status in spanish adults: The ANIBES study

nutrients Article Lifestyle Patterns and Weight Status in Spanish Adults: The ANIBES Study Carmen Pérez-Rodrigo 1, Marta Gianzo-Citores 2,Ángel Gil 3,4, Marcela González-Gross 4,5, Rosa M. Ortega 6, Lluis Serra-Majem 4,7, Gregorio Varela-Moreiras 8,9 and Javier Aranceta-Bartrina 4,10,* 1FIDEC Foundation, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Gurtubay s/n, 48010 Bilbao, Spain; carmenperezr[email protected] 2 Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine and Nursery, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Bo Sarriena s/n, Leioa, 48940 Bizkaia, Spain; [email protected] 3Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology II, Institute of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Centre of Biomedical Research, University of Granada, Campus de la Salud, Avda. del Conocimiento, Armilla, 18100 Granada, Spain; [email protected] 4CIBEROBN, Biomedical Research Networking Center for Physiopathology of Obesity and Nutrition, Carlos III Health Institute, 28029 Madrid, Spain; marcela.gonzalez.gr[email protected] (M.G.-G.); [email protected] (L.S.-M.) 5ImFINE Research Group, Department of Health and Human Performance, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, C/Martín Fierro 7, 28040 Madrid, Spain 6Department of Nutrition, Faculty of Pharmacy, Complutense University of Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] 7Research Institute of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Paseo Blas Cabrera Felipe “Físico” s/n, 35016 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain 8Department of Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, CEU San Pablo University, Urb. Montepríncipe, Crta. Boadilla Km. 5.3, Boadilla del Monte, 28668 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] or gvar[email protected] 9Spanish Nutrition Foundation (FEN), C/General Álvarez de Castro 20. 1a pta, 28010 Madrid, Spain 10 Department of Food Sciences and Physiology, University of Navarra, C/Irunlarrea 1, 31008 Pamplona, Spain *Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected]; Tel.: +34-608-580924 Received: 10 April 2017; Accepted: 8 June 2017; Published: 14 June 2017 Abstract: Limited knowledge is available on lifestyle patterns in Spanish adults. We investigated dietary patterns and possible meaningful clustering of physical activity, sedentary behavior, sleep time, and smoking in Spanish adults aged 18–64 years and their association with obesity. Analysis was based on a subsample (n= 1617) of the cross-sectional ANIBES study in Spain. We performed exploratory factor analysis and subsequent cluster analysis of dietary patterns, physical activity, sedentary behaviors, sleep time, and smoking. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore the association between the cluster solutions and obesity. Factor analysis identified four dietary patterns, “Traditional DP”, “Mediterranean DP”, “Snack DP” and “Dairy-sweet DP”. Dietary patterns, physical activity behaviors, sedentary behaviors, sleep time, and smoking in Spanish adults aggregated into three different clusters of lifestyle patterns: “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”, “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern” and “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern”. A higher proportion of people aged 18–30 years was classified into the “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern”. The prevalence odds ratio for obesity in men in the “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern” was significantly lower compared to those in the “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern”. Those behavior patterns are helpful to identify specific issues in population subgroups and inform intervention strategies. The findings in this study underline the importance of designing and implementing interventions that address multiple health risk practices, considering lifestyle patterns and associated determinants. Nutrients 2017,9, 606; doi:10.3390/nu9060606 www.mdpi.com/journal/nutrients Nutrients 2017,9, 606 2 of 17 Keywords: cluster analysis; dietary patterns; lifestyle patterns; physical activity; sedentary behavior; obesity; adults 1. Introduction Overweight and obesity have progressively increased during the last decades and have become a major issue in public health, both in developed and developing economies across the five continents [1,2]. In Spain, recent data report that more than half of adults aged 18–64 years are classified as overweight or obese [ 3 , 4 ]. This is particularly worrying for the negative impact of this condition on health and quality of life [ 2 , 5 , 6 ]. In fact, the Global Burden of Disease project highlights that high body mass index (BMI) values were among the main risk factors driving most death and disability combined in the country in 2015 [7]. Overweight and obesity result from an imbalance between energy intake and expenditure. The role of diet in obesity is complex. Most research in this area has focused on specific foods and nutrients [ 8 , 9 ]. Nevertheless, the analysis of food patterns is particularly interesting, since foods are usually consumed in combinations and those may have synergistic, antagonistic, or moderating effects [10]. In addition, to date, it is acknowledged that joint interactions of multiple variables acting at different levels influence weight gain, such as lifestyles [ 11 – 13 ], sleep, including rhythm, duration or quality of sleep [ 14 , 15 ], eating behaviors [ 16 ], socioeconomic level, education, and other factors [ 4 , 11 ]. Data-driven methods explore the similarities between different food options in specific population groups [ 8 ]. Specifically, cluster analyses include several techniques aimed at grouping together individuals sharing a number of features or similar lifestyles. This classification allows for a better understanding of the influences of behaviors and lifestyles, as well as the potential cumulative effects of an unhealthy combination of those factors on the development of overweight and obesity [ 16 ]. Research of dietary patterns and the potential combination of those with other lifestyles can contribute to identifying effective strategies for the prevention of overweight and obesity among adults, as well as its social and health consequences [8]. Considering the above, the objectives of this paper are (a) to identify food patterns in the Spanish adult population; (b) to investigate if energy balance-related behaviors tend to assemble into meaningful patterns in Spanish adults; (c) to describe existing relationships between socio-demographical factors and different lifestyle patterns; and, finally; (d) to analyze the potential association of those correlates with excess body weight. 2. Materials and Methods The data for this analysis were obtained from the ANIBES study, an observational cross-sectional study conducted on a random sample of the Spanish population aged 9–75 years. The aims and procedures used in ANIBES have been previously reported [17,18]. Briefly, the sample design of the ANIBES study was based on the Spanish population census 2012 according to sex, age, residence, and regional population size. A stratified multistep sampling procedure was used, with random selection of addresses in the municipalities and age and sex quotas for individuals within households. Interlocked quotas were established for age in the regions and size of habitat within the region. The sample selection procedure was based on random paths; 128 sampling points were selected. The final sample of the study consisted of 2009 individuals (1013 men, 50.4%, 996 women, 49.6%). In addition, a boost sample was recruited for the younger groups (9–12 years; 13–17 years, and 18–24 years) in order to ensure at least 200 individuals in each age group. Data for individuals aged 18–64 years were used for this analysis. That age range is meaningful from a risk prevention point of view, since it includes adults in the active working life span, thus, relevant when designing targeted preventive and health promotion strategies, considering different settings, such as workplaces, Nutrients 2017,9, 606 3 of 17 primary health care, and community-based interventions. In addition, the focus on the 18–64 year-old range was also relevant for comparison with previous studies conducted in Spain [ 19 ]. Data were collected between mid-September and mid-November 2013. The final protocol of the study was approved by the ethical research committee of the Community of Madrid, Spain. 2.1. Measurements 2.1.1. Lifestyle Factors Diet Dietary intake was assessed by means of a face-to-face 24-h diet recall interview assisted by a food picture atlas to estimate portion sizes. In addition participants completed a three-day food record aided by a tablet device (Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 7.0, Samsung Electronics, Suwon, South Korea), two consecutive weekdays and one weekend day, recording all foods and beverages consumed at home and away from home. Processing of food record inputs, coding and data cleaning has been extensively reported elsewhere [ 17 , 18 ]. Energy and nutrient intakes were calculated using new specifically-developed software, (VD-FEN 2.1 software -Dietary Evaluation Programme, Spanish Nutrition Foundation, Madrid, Spain) for the ANIBES study [ 20 ]. Consumption of all food and beverages was arranged into 16 food groups, 45 subgroups, and 754 food items, for in-depth analysis, based on the structure of the food composition database considering similarities in nutrient profile (Supplementary Materials Table S1). Physical Activity Physical activity data were collected by face-to-face interview using the validated International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) [ 21 ]. Total minutes per week were computed for moderate to vigorous physical activity based on the IPAQ guidelines for data processing and analyses [ 22 ]. Data were cleaned and truncated based on IPAQ guidelines and previous research [ 23 ]. Additionally, the total minutes per week of commuting-related physical activity (walking, biking) were computed. IPAQ data was used for this analysis. Z-scores of minutes per week for each type of activity were calculated. Sleep Duration Sleep habits included the number of hours slept per night, on average, as reported by each individual. Smoking Smoking habits were assessed by different items in the protocol, including “During the past year, how many cigarettes per day did you smoke on average?” 2.1.2. Body Measurements Anthropometric measurements were taken individually by trained interviewers, following international standard procedures previously tested in two pilot studies [ 24 ], reported in detail elsewhere [ 17 , 18 ]. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated as body weight in kilograms divided by the square of body height in meters. Overweight status was defined as BMI ≥25; obesity as BMI ≥30. 2.1.3. Covariates Education The education levels were established in accordance with the Spanish educational system. Nutrients 2017,9, 606 4 of 17 After preliminary analysis of the distribution of the variable, categories were collapsed and recoded into a three-point scale, as follows: (1) low (less than seven years of education; primary school or less); (2) medium (7–12 years of education; lower to higher secondary education); and (3) high (13 years or more of education; higher vocational, college, and university studies). Geographical Area Geographical area in the country was collapsed into four different categories: north-northwest region; eastern region; central region and southern region. 2.2. Data Cleaning Detailed data cleaning procedures have been previously described [ 17 , 18 ]. Participants were considered fully eligible after a verified quality check of the input from the tablet device of adequately completed three-day food records. After data cleaning stages, individuals remained in the database if they had successfully completed both face-to-face interviews during fieldwork and had measured weight, height, and waist circumference data. Of the initial sample of 1655 recruited individuals aged 18–64 years, 1617 individuals satisfied the inclusion criteria and had complete data for all of the variables included in this analysis. 2.3. Data Analysis All statistical tests were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics were computed for each variable. 2.3.1. Dietary Patterns Exploratory factor analysis was performed to identify underlying dietary patterns, using the average food weight (g/day) consumed by each individual (three-day food record plus one-day 24-h recall) from 38 food groups as input variables. Food groups were used to further collapse dietary intake data in order to avoid missing data from non-consumers of episodically consumed foods. Z-scores for each food group were calculated to prevent the components being dominated by the foods that provide the highest amounts. Bartlett’s test of sphericity and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy were used to verify the appropriateness of factor analysis. Factors were also orthogonally rotated (the varimax option) to enhance the difference between loadings, which allowed for easier interpretability. Factors were retained based on the following criteria: factor eigenvalue > 1.20, identification of a break point in the scree plot, the proportion of variance explained, and factor interpretability [25]. The strength and direction of the associations between patterns and food groups were described through a rotated factor loading matrix. Food groups with factor loadings > 0.30 and communality > 0.20 were retained in the patterns identified. The factor score for each pattern was constructed by summing the observed intakes of the component food items weighted by the factor loading. A high factor score for a given pattern indicated high intake of the foods constituting that food factor, and a low score indicated low intake of those foods. 2.3.2. Lifestyle Patterns To identify clusters with similar dietary patterns, physical activities, sedentary activities, sleeping habits and smoking a combination of hierarchical and non-hierarchical clustering analysis was used [ 26 ]. The variables used had different arithmetic scales; thus, Z-scores were calculated to standardize the dataset before clustering, to avoid a greater contribution to the distance of variables having larger ranges than variables with smaller ranges. Univariate and multivariate outliers (>3 SD) were removed. First, hierarchical cluster analysis was performed using Ward’s method, based on squared Euclidian distances. Several possible cluster solutions were identified and compared to inform Nutrients 2017,9, 606 5 of 17 the next step, considering the coefficients and fusion level. A non-hierarchical k-means clustering procedure was used, specifying the number of clusters identified in the first step, using a random initial seed and 10 iterations in order to further refine the preliminary solution by optimizing the classification. The final cluster solution was selected based on interpretability and the percent of the study population in each cluster. Reliability and stability of the final cluster solution was tested by randomly taking a subsample (50%) of the total sample and repeating the analyses on this subsample. To check agreement, a kappa statistic was calculated between the cluster solutions of the subsample and that of the total sample. Pearson’s chi-square tests were used to investigate the differences in cluster distribution by gender, age group, education level, geographical area, and BMI status. One-way ANOVA was used to compare physical activities, sedentary behaviors and sleep time across clusters stratified by gender and age group. General linear models were used to estimate multivariate means for food consumption and dietary pattern scores across clusters adjusted for age and energy intake. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to explore the prevalence odds ratios for obesity and overweight among lifestyle patterns. The models were adjusted for energy intake, sex, age, educational level, and geographical area. Statistical tests were two-tailed with a 5% level of significance. 3. Results 3.1. Sample Characteristics After exclusion of outliers and participants with incomplete data, 1617 subjects aged 18–64 years, 781 men and 836 women, were included in the analyses (Table S2). Some 38% of the sample was classified in the BMI range 25–29.9 and 21.6% had BMI values ≥ 30. There was no significant difference between men and women in age distribution, level of education, or geographical area. However, overweight and obesity rates were significantly higher in men than women. 3.2. Dietary Patterns Dietary patterns were computed for the entire sample. Bartlett’s test of sphericity and KMO = 0.591 supported the appropriateness of factor analysis. Four major factors were extracted, which explained 33.1% of the variance in the model. The first dietary pattern (DP) was labeled “Traditional DP” which had the highest loading on olive oil and vegetables, high scores on fish, meat, and fruit, and negative scores on pasta and so-called “pre-cooked” foods, which include food items such as croquettes and other processed foods usually prepared deep-fried for consumption. A DP labeled “Mediterranean DP” had high scores on water, fruit, yoghourt, fish, vegetables, cheese, and olive oil, and negative scores on meat and sugar sweetened beverages. A DP labeled “Snack DP” had high scores on bread, processed and cold meats, alcoholic beverages, salted snacks, cheese, and juices. Finally, “Dairy-sweet DP” had high scores on milk, sugar and sweets, cakes, pastry, and juices, and negative scores on alcoholic beverages. Overall, these patterns explained 33.07% of the variance (Figure 1). Mean factor scores for “Traditional DP” and “Mediterranean DP” were significantly higher in the oldest age group (50–64 years), while “Dairy-sweet DP” factor scores were significantly higher in the younger ones (18–30 years). Men had significantly higher scores than women for “Snack DP” adjusted for age and energy intake; “Mediterranean DP” and “Dairy-sweet DP” had significantly higher scores among women. “Mediterranean DP” and “Traditional DP” factor scores were significantly higher in people with a higher educational level. Factor scores for the “Traditional DP” and “Dairy-sweet DP”, adjusted for energy intake, age, and gender, were significantly higher in the north-northwest region, while “Mediterranean DP” and “Snack DP” factor scores were significantly higher in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Nutrients 2017,9, 606 6 of 17 Nutrients 2017, 9, 606 6 of 16 Figure 1. Factor loadings after varimax rotation on identified dietary patterns of food groups retained. Eigenvalues: Traditional DP = 2.15; Mediterranean DP = 1.64; Snack DP = 1.55; Dairy-sweet DP = 1.28. Percent of variance explained: Traditional DP: 8.74%; Mediterranean DP: 8.39%; Snack DP: 8.19%; Dairy sweet DP: 7.74%. Total variance explained 33.07%. Absolute values less than 0.20 are not shown. Mean factor scores for “Traditional DP” and “Mediterranean DP” were significantly higher in the oldest age group (50–64 years), while “Dairy-sweet DP” factor scores were significantly higher in the younger ones (18–30 years). Men had significantly higher scores than women for “Snack DP” adjusted for age and energy intake; “Mediterranean DP” and “Dairy-sweet DP” had significantly higher scores among women. “Mediterranean DP” and “Traditional DP” factor scores were significantly higher in people with a higher educational level. Factor scores for the “Traditional DP” and “Dairy-sweet DP”, adjusted for energy intake, age, and gender, were significantly higher in the north-northwest region, while “Mediterranean DP” and “Snack DP” factor scores were significantly higher in the Eastern Mediterranean region. 3.3. Lifestyle Patterns Based on the four identified DPs, minutes per week of vigorous, moderate physical activity, walking, biking, sedentary time, sleep duration on weekdays, and smoking habits, the three-cluster solution was found to be adequate and meaningful regarding the different patterns. The kappa statistic (κ = 0.94) suggested good agreement. Differential characteristics of each cluster are identified by high (above 0) or low Z-scores (below 0) comparing cluster centers in Z-scores (Figure S1). Cluster 1, labeled “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”, drew a lifestyle pattern with high scores on the “Snack DP” (Z-score = 0.42), the “Mediterranean DP” (Z-score = 0.27), walking (Z-score = 0.58), vigorous physical activity (Z-score = 2.09) and moderate physical activity (Z-score=0.33), combined with low scores on sedentary time (Z-score = −0.40) and sleeping (Z-score = −0.25). The second cluster, labeled “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”, had low scores on “Dairy-sweet DP” (Z-score = −0.40), “Snack DP” (Z-score = −0.16), vigorous physical activity (Z-score = −0.34) and sedentary time (Z-score = −0.19). Finally, a third cluster labeled “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern” had high scores on “Dairy-sweet DP” (Z-score = 1.09), “Snack DP” (Z-score = 0.19) and .718 .698 -.494 -.345 .341 .288 .325 .202 .309 -.245 .591 .557 -.546 .445 .357 .361 .207 .732 .672 .408 .395 .364 .222 -.259 .694 .672 .651 .270 -.600 -.400 -.200 .000 .200 .400 .600 .800 Olive oil Vegetables Pasta Pre-cooked fried foods Meat Legumes Water Fruit Sugar sweetened soft drinks Yogourt Fish Bread Processed-cold meats Alcoholic Bevs Salted snacks Cheese Milk Sugar and sweets Cakes, pastry Juices Traditional' DP Medterranean' DP Snack' DP Dairy-sweet' DP Figure 1. Factor loadings after varimax rotation on identified dietary patterns of food groups retained. Eigenvalues: Traditional DP = 2.15; Mediterranean DP = 1.64; Snack DP = 1.55; Dairy-sweet DP = 1.28. Percent of variance explained: Traditional DP: 8.74%; Mediterranean DP: 8.39%; Snack DP: 8.19%; Dairy sweet DP: 7.74%. Total variance explained 33.07%. Absolute values less than 0.20 are not shown. 3.3. Lifestyle Patterns Based on the four identified DPs, minutes per week of vigorous, moderate physical activity, walking, biking, sedentary time, sleep duration on weekdays, and smoking habits, the three-cluster solution was found to be adequate and meaningful regarding the different patterns. The kappa statistic (κ= 0.94) suggested good agreement. Differential characteristics of each cluster are identified by high (above 0) or low Z-scores (below 0) comparing cluster centers in Z-scores (Figure S1). Cluster 1, labeled “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”, drew a lifestyle pattern with high scores on the “Snack DP” (Z-score = 0.42), the “Mediterranean DP” (Z-score = 0.27), walking (Z-score = 0.58), vigorous physical activity (Z-score = 2.09) and moderate physical activity (Z-score=0.33), combined with low scores on sedentary time (Z-score = − 0.40) and sleeping (Z-score = − 0.25). The second cluster, labeled “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”, had low scores on “Dairy-sweet DP” (Z-score = − 0.40), “Snack DP” (Z-score = − 0.16), vigorous physical activity (Z-score = − 0.34) and sedentary time (Z-score = − 0.19). Finally, a third cluster labeled “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern” had high scores on “Dairy-sweet DP” (Z-score = 1.09), “Snack DP” (Z-score = 0.19) and sedentary time (Z-score = 0.73) and scored negatively on moderate (Z-score = − 0.42) and vigorous physical activity (Z-score = −0.26), as well as smoking (Z-score = −0.21). Characteristics of the subjects classified in the lifestyle patterns identified are described in Table 1. The “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern” included 13% of the sample and a significantly higher proportion of men. The “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern” included 63.3% of the sample, a significantly higher proportion of women. The “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern” included 23.6% of the sample. Nutrients 2017,9, 606 7 of 17 Table 1. Gender, age group, educational level, geographical area, and BMI status by lifestyle pattern. Characteristics Mixed Diet-Physically Active-Low Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Not Poor Diet-Low Physical Activity-Low Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Poor Diet-Low Physical Activity-Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern All χ2p n%n%n%n All 210 13.0 1020 63.3 381 23.6 1611 Gender Men 151 71.9 423 41.5 204 53.5 778 70.1 0.000 Women 59 28.1 597 58.5 177 46.5 833 Age group 18–30 years 61 29.0 213 20.9 139 36.5 413 60.3 0.000 31–49 years 110 52.4 487 47.7 183 48.0 780 50–64 years 39 18.6 320 31.4 59 15.5 418 Educational level 27.8 0.000 Primary or less 55 26.2 304 29.8 73 19.2 432 Secondary 95 45.2 507 49.7 189 49.6 791 Higher 60 28.6 209 20.5 119 31.2 388 Geographical area North-northwest 36 17.1 166 16.3 74 19.4 276 4.7 0.577 Eastern-Mediterranean 70 33.3 350 34.3 127 33.3 547 Center 48 22.9 233 22.8 96 25.2 377 South 56 26.7 271 26.6 84 22.0 411 BMI status Normal weight 88 41.9 385 37.7 177 46.5 650 17.3 0.002 Overweight 90 42.9 386 37.8 136 35.7 612 Obese 32 15.2 249 24.4 68 17.8 349 Pearson’s chi-square tests were used to investigate the differences in cluster distribution by gender, age group, education level, geographical area, and BMI status. A higher percentage of people across age groups were classified into the “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”. However, a significantly lower proportion of individuals in the older age group (50–64 years) was classified in the “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern” and a higher proportion of people aged 18–30 years were classified into the “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern”. The highest proportion of people with a lower educational level was classified into the “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”. There was no difference in the clusters by geographical area. Prevalence rates of obesity were significantly higher among people allocated in the “Not poor diet-low physical activity-low sedentary lifestyle pattern” and overweight in the “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”, however, those differences were not significant in the stratified analysis by age and gender. Table 2describes physical activity behaviors, sedentary, sleep time on weekdays, smoking behavior, and dietary pattern Z-scores in the lifestyle patterns. Vigorous physical activity, moderate physical activity, walking time, as well as the Z-scores of the Mediterranean DP were significantly higher in men and women classified in the “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”. Z-scores for “Snack DP” were also higher in men in that lifestyle pattern. Men and women in the “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern” had significantly higher scores on the “Dairy-sweet DP” and sedentary time. Consumption of selected food groups and beverages by lifestyle pattern in men and women is described in Table 3. Consumption of fruit, pasta, olive oil, water and alcoholic beverages, particularly wine and beer, was significantly higher in men and women included in the “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary lifestyle pattern”. Consumption of milk, cakes and pastry, sugar and sweets was significantly higher in men and women classified in the “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern”. Men in this lifestyle pattern showed significantly higher consumption of pre-cooked deep fried foods and high alcoholic content beverages. Women in this pattern had significantly higher consumption of savory snacks, juices and sugar sweetened soft drinks beverages. Prevalence of obesity was compared between lifestyle patterns, adjusting for gender, age, educational level, geographical area and energy intake (Table 4). The prevalence odds ratio (POR) for obesity in men, 0.52 (IC 95% 0.29–0.92) allocated in the “Mixed diet-physically active-low sedentary Nutrients 2017,9, 606 8 of 17 lifestyle pattern” was significantly lower compared to those in the “Poor diet-low physical activity-sedentary lifestyle pattern”. Table 2. Physical activity behaviors, sedentary, sleep time on weekdays, smoking behavior, and dietary pattern scores in the lifestyle patterns by gender *. Mixed Diet-Physically Active-Low Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Not Poor Diet-Low Physical Activity-Low Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Poor Diet-Low Physical Activity-Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Fp Mean SD Median Mean SD Median Mean SD Median Men n= 151 n= 423 n= 204 “Traditional DP”score 0.04 1.03 0.00 0.05 1.04 0.00 −0.03 0.95 0.00 1.2 0.314 “Mediterranean DP”score 0.25 1.35 0.06 −0.17 1.00 −0.23 −0.12 0.96 −0.09 8.0 0.000 “Snack DP”score 0.66 1.29 0.52 0.14 0.95 0.07 0.46 1.14 0.31 9.9 0.000 “Dairy-sweet DP”score −0.05 0.99 −0.11 −0.49 0.61 −0.51 1.03 1.21 0.88 126.9 0.000 Walking (min/week) 447.8 434.4 240.0 284.7 291.7 210.0 240.7 274.9 150.0 20.3 0.000 Moderate PA (min/week) 478.4 426.9 360.0 321.1 360.1 180.0 174.1 234.8 112.5 32.8 0.000 Vigorous PA (min/week) 706.4 291.7 720.0 81.8 127.3 0.0 102.3 155.4 0.0 734.1 0.000 Sedentary time (h/day) 3.6 2.0 3.0 4.4 2.3 4.0 7.1 3.7 6.4 96.8 0.000 Sleeping (h/day) 6.6 2.3 7.0 7.1 1.9 7.5 7.0 2.0 7.0 3.9 0.021 Smoking (cig/day) 4.3 6.9 0.0 6.4 8.7 0.0 3.1 6.0 0.0 10.2 0.000 Women n= 59 n= 597 n= 177 “Traditional DP”score −0.30 1.02 −0.20 0.02 0.96 −0.02 −0.12 1.00 −0.10 7.2 0.001 “Mediterranean DP”score 0.33 1.06 0.45 0.03 0.89 0.05 0.09 0.92 0.09 7.2 0.001 “Snack DP”score −0.20 0.94 −0.37 −0.38 0.75 −0.49 −0.12 0.82 −0.29 7.2 0.001 Dairy-sweet DP’ score 0.03 0.74 −0.02 −0.33 0.60 −0.36 1.16 0.89 1.09 203.0 0.000 Walking (min/week) 528.6 364.1 420.0 267.0 270.2 180.0 247.5 263.0 180.0 25.6 0.000 Moderate PA (min/week) 740.3 399.6 750.0 545.8 442.9 420.0 316.9 332.2 210.0 25.2 0.000 Vigorous PA (min/week) 692.0 325.3 630.0 45.9 92.2 0.0 57.8 120.2 0.0 685.4 0.000 Sedentary time (h/day) 3.6 2.1 3.0 4.0 2.2 4.0 6.6 4.1 6.0 60.5 0.000 Sleeping (h/day) 6.2 2.5 7.0 7.1 1.9 7.5 7.0 2.2 7.5 6.3 0.002 Smoking (cig/day) 2.5 5.6 0.0 3.9 7.0 0.0 2.3 5.2 0.0 4.5 0.011 * Physical activities, sedentary time, sleep, and smoking compared by ANOVA considering age group. General linear models adjusted for age and energy intake to compare DP scores. Nutrients 2017,9, 606 9 of 17 Table 3. Consumption of selected food groups and beverages by lifestyle pattern in men and women. Mixed Diet-Physically Active-Low Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Not Poor Diet-Low Physical Activity-Low Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Poor Diet-Low Physical Activity-Sedentary Lifestyle Pattern Fp Mean SD Median Mean SD Median Mean SD Median Men (n= 781) (n= 151) (n= 423) (n= 204) Vegetables (g/day) 184.9 110.9 165.4 185.1 112.4 162.5 178.2 97.2 165.0 0.98 0.374 Fruit (g/day) 183.1 231.0 136.7 145.0 172.7 97.5 139.5 144.0 103.9 3.24 0.040 Legumes (g/day) 16.7 23.1 7.5 16.2 19.1 10.5 13.6 18.2 7.1 2.19 0.113 Meat (g/day) 127.2 92.3 111.7 109.8 75.3 95.8 124.9 77.4 116.3 0.56 0.573 Processed and cold meats (g/day) 55.8 46.6 44.3 42.5 36.0 34.2 50.3 39.1 45.9 2.46 0.086 Fish (g/day) 73.6 90.8 47.7 62.5 66.9 39.3 55.8 57.1 35.4 3.01 0.050 Eggs (g/day) 40.8 46.4 31.3 32.5 33.4 21.3 28.3 30.4 20.0 9.58 0.000 Milk (mL/day) 155.5 122.9 139.7 125.6 100.7 115.0 267.5 178.5 249.4 60.42 0.000 Cheese (g/day) 25.4 41.4 15.2 15.8 20.0 10.0 19.2 22.2 12.9 4.39 0.013 Yoghourt (g/day) 62.3 74.5 41.7 42.3 64.2 0.0 46.2 62.0 20.8 3.62 0.027 Pasta (g/day) 22.6 27.5 12.5 16.2 20.0 11.7 17.7 20.2 11.7 3.08 0.047 Bread (g/day) 94.4 57.4 83.3 83.6 44.6 80.0 97.5 58.2 85.0 1.15 0.318 Cakes and pastry (g/day) 30.3 36.1 16.7 21.1 25.7 11.7 57.8 46.3 50.2 44.80 0.000 Sugar and sweets (g/day) 15.0 15.4 10.0 10.0 9.8 7.5 24.7 18.5 21.8 43.23 0.000 Pre-cooked foods (g/day) 73.0 83.0 50.0 76.3 86.9 45.8 80.0 91.3 46.3 3.45 0.032 Savory snacks (g/day) 6.1 12.1 0.0 4.7 10.1 0.0 7.5 14.3 0.0 0.51 0.603 Olive oil (mL/day) 20.0 8.9 20.2 18.0 8.8 16.7 17.3 7.5 18.0 6.40 0.002 Juices (mL/day) 71.0 123.9 0.0 40.0 79.8 0.0 88.6 175.4 0.0 1.51 0.221 Sugar sweetened soft drinks (mL/day) 104.2 151.5 41.7 97.7 186.7 0.0 127.2 192.2 47.5 2.44 0.088 Water (mL/day) 843.4 647.7 695.8 638.0 537.2 513.3 757.4 582.2 685.0 3.62 0.027 Alcoholic beverages (mL/day) 186.1 259.4 71.7 176.4 241.2 58.3 102.7 181.9 0.0 14.33 0.000 Low alcohol content bevs (mL/day) 1.6 5.7 0.0 2.8 11.6 0.0 3.4 19.4 0.0 2.95 0.05 High alcohol content bevs (mL/day) 184.5 257.6 71.7 173.6 238.8 55.8 99.3 177.3 0.0 14.31 0.00 Nutrients 2017,9, 606 16 of 17 22. IPAQ. Guidelines for Data Processing and Analysis of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)—Short and Long Forms. November 2005. Available online: https://sites.google.com/site/theipaq/ scoring-protocol (accessed on 27 October 2015). 23. Bauman, A.; Ainsworth, B.E.; Bull, F.; Craig, C.L.; Hagströmer, M.; Sallis, J.F.; Pratt, M.; Sjöström, M. Progress and Pitfalls in the Use of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) for Adult Physical Activity Surveillance. J. Phys. Act. Health 2009,6, S5–S8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 24. Marfell-Jones, M.; Olds, T.; Stewart, A.; Carter, L. International Standards for Anthropometric Assessment; International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry: Potchefstroom, South Africa, 2006; pp. 1–137. 25. Newby, P.K.; Tucker, K.L. Empirically derived eating patterns using factor or cluster analysis: A review. Nutr. Rev. 2004,62, 177–203. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 26. Everitt, B.S.; Landau, S.; Leese, M.; Stahl, D. Cluster Analysis, 5th ed.; JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.: West Sussex, UK, 2011. 27. Hu, F.B. Dietary pattern analysis: A new direction in nutritional epidemiology. Curr. Opin. Lipidol. 2002 ,13, 3–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 28. Hodge, A.; Bassett, J. What can we learn from dietary pattern analysis? Public Health Nutr. 2016 ,19, 191–194. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 29. Varraso, R.; Garcia-Aymerich, J.; Monier, F.; Le Moual, N.; De Batlle, J.; Miranda, G.; Pison, C.; Romieu, I.; Kauffmann, F.; Maccario, J. Assessment of dietary patterns in nutritional epidemiology: Principal component analysis compared with confirmatory factor analysis. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2012 ,96, 1079–1092. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 30. Wadolowska, L.; Kowalkowska, J.; Czarnocinska, J.; Jezewska-Zychowicz, M.; Babicz-Zielinska, E. Comparing dietary patterns derived by two methods and their associations with obesity in Polish girls aged 13–21 years: The cross-sectional GEBaHealth study. Perspect. Public Health 2017 ,137, 182–189. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 31. Wirfalt, A.K.; Jeffery, R.W. Using cluster analysis to examine dietary patterns: Nutrient intakes, gender, and weight status differ across food pattern clusters. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1997,97, 272–279. [CrossRef] 32. Leech, R.M.; McNaughton, S.A.; Timperio, A. The clustering of diet, physical activity and sedentary behavior in children and adolescents: A review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014,11, 4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 33. Pérez-Rodrigo, C.; Gil, A.; González-Gross, M.; Ortega, R.M.; Serra-Majem, L.; Varela-Moreiras, G.; Aranceta-Bartrina, J. Clustering of Dietary Patterns, Lifestyles, and Overweight among Spanish Children and Adolescents in the ANIBES Study. Nutrients 2016,8, 11. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 34. Allès, B.; Samieri, C.; Lorrain, S.; Jutand, M.A.; Carmichael, P.H.; Shatenstein, B.; Gaudreau, P.; Payette, H.; Laurin, D.; Barberger-Gateau, P. Nutrient Patterns and Their Food Sources in Older Persons from France and Quebec: Dietary and Lifestyle Characteristics. Nutrients 2016,8, 225. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 35. Blondin, S.A.; Mueller, M.P.; Bakun, P.J.; Choumenkovitch, S.F.; Tucker, K.L.; Economos, C.D. Cross-Sectional Associations between Empirically-Derived Dietary Patterns and Indicators of Disease Risk among University Students. Nutrients 2016,8, 3. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 36. Appannah, G.; Pot, G.K.; Huang, R.C.; Oddy, W.H.; Beilin, L.J.; Mori, T.A.; Jebb, S.A.; Ambrosini, G.L. Identification of a dietary pattern associated with greater cardiometabolic risk in adolescence. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2015,25, 643–650. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 37. Bell, L.K.; Edwards, S.; Grieger, J.A. The Relationship between Dietary Patterns and Metabolic Health in a Representative Sample of Adult Australians. Nutrients 2015,7, 6491–6505. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 38. Shu, L.; Zheng, P.F.; Zhang, X.Y.; Si, C.J.; Yu, X.L.; Gao, W.; Zhang, L.; Liao, D. Association between Dietary Patterns and the Indicators of Obesity among Chinese: A Cross-Sectional Study. Nutrients 2015 ,7, 7995–8009. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 39. Newby, P.K.; Muller, D.; Hallfrisch, J.; Andres, R.; Tucker, K.L. Food patterns measured by factor analysis and anthropometric changes in adults. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2004,80, 504–513. [PubMed] 40. Johns, D.J.; Lindroos, A.K.; Jebb, S.A.; Sjostrom, L.; Carlsson, L.M.; Ambrosini, G.L. Dietary patterns, cardiometabolic risk factors, and the incidence of cardiovascular disease in severe obesity. Obesity 2015 ,23, 1063–1070. [CrossRef] [PubMed] Nutrients 2017,9, 606 17 of 17 41. Mackenbach, J.D.; Brage, S.; Forouhi, N.G.; Griffin, S.J.; Wareham, N.J.; Monsivais, P. Does the importance of dietary costs for fruit and vegetable intake vary by socioeconomic position? Br. J. Nutr. 2015 ,114, 1464–1470. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 42. de Azevedo Barros, M.B.; Guimarães Lima, M.; Barbosa Medina, L.P.; Landman Szwarcwald, C.; Carvalho Malta, D. Social inequalities in health behaviors among Brazilian adults: National Health Survey, 2013. Int. J. Equity Health 2016,15, 148. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 43. Cassidy, S.; Chau, J.Y.; Catt, M.; Bauman, A.; Trenell, M.I. Low physical activity, high television viewing and poor sleep duration cluster in overweight and obese adults; a cross-sectional study of 398,984 participants from the UK Biobank. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017,14, 57. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 44. Meader, N.; King, K.; Moe-Byrne, T.; Wright, K.; Graham, H.; Petticrew, M.; Power, C.; White, M.; Sowden, A.J. A systematic review on the clustering and co-occurrence of multiple risk behaviours. BMC Public Health 2016,16, 657. [CrossRef] [PubMed] © 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).