Table 2

β-Coefficients for association of baseline diet quality scores and 2-year change in cognitive function for Puerto Rican adults with versus without type 2 diabetes*

HEIAHEIDASH
β ± SEP valueβ ± SEP valueβ ± SEP value
Without type 2 diabetes
 Global cognitive function§0.001 ± 0.0010.740.002 ± 0.0020.250.002 ± 0.0040.53
 Executive function§−0.287 ± 0.0300.390.002 ± 0.0030.420.003 ± 0.0060.68
 Memory function§0.011 ± 0.0030.0020.012 ± 0.0040.0010.024 ± 0.0080.003
 MMSE−0.012 ± 0.0100.240.001 ± 0.0110.940.003 ± 0.0240.91
 Word list learning0.049 ± 0.0420.250.066 ± 0.0430.130.224 ± 0.0970.021
 Word recognition0.063 ± 0.0200.0020.062 ± 0.0210.0040.081 ± 0.0480.09
 Stroop−0.004 ± 0.0390.920.078 ± 0.0410.060.271 ± 0.0910.003
 Letter fluency0.002 ± 0.0390.95−0.034 ± 0.0420.42−0.064 ± 0.0920.48
 Digit span forward−0.011 ± 0.0070.110.001 ± 0.0070.89−0.012 ± 0.0150.44
 Digit span backward−0.003 ± 0.0050.560.002 ± 0.0060.730.012 ± 0.0130.34
 Clock drawing−0.001 ± 0.0030.760.002 ± 0.0040.510.001 ± 0.0080.92
 Figure copying0.017 ± 0.0250.500.026 ± 0.0250.320.059 ± 0.0580.31
With type 2 diabetes
 Global cognitive function§0.003 ± 0.0020.180.001 ± 0.0020.570.002 ± 0.0050.65
 Executive function§0.001 ± 0.0040.740.002 ± 0.0040.54−0.001 ± 0.0080.90
 Memory function§0.007 ± 0.0050.190.007 ± 0.0050.170.020 ± 0.0120.09
 MMSE0.023 ± 0.0140.090.003 ± 0.0140.850.047 ± 0.0320.14
 Word list learning0.012 ± 0.0540.820.080 ± 0.0540.140.128 ± 0.1190.25
 Word recognition0.074 ± 0.0300.0140.033 ± 0.0300.270.039 ± 0.0670.56
 Stroop−0.052 ± 0.0460.26−0.021 ± 0.0450.640.029 ± 0.1000.78
 Letter fluency0.018 ± 0.0410.67−0.019 ± 0.0420.65−0.100 ± 0.0920.28
 Digit span forward0.014 ± 0.0090.130.008 ± 0.0090.36−0.024 ± 0.0200.23
 Digit span backward-0.016 ± 0.0070.0230.0001 ± 0.0070.980.007 ± 0.0160.65
 Clock drawing0.007 ± 0.0060.200.004 ± 0.0060.500.006 ± 0.0130.62
 Figure copying−0.010 ± 0.0310.74−0.040 ± 0.0310.20−0.049 ± 0.0710.49
  • Statistically significant associations at P < 0.05 are shown in boldface type.

  • *Repeated-measures linear mixed-effects models predicting 2-year change in each cognitive function test by continuous diet quality score, adjusted for sex, age, marital status, income-to-poverty ratio, educational attainment, food security status, smoking status, psychological acculturation, physical activity score, depressive symptomatology score, hypertension status, homocysteine, CRP, BMI, baseline value, and time. Models for AHEI and DASH were additionally adjusted for energy intake.

  • †The HEI-2005 was assessed based on dietary guideline recommendations for 12 foods or nutrients; score ranges 0–100. The AHEI-2010 was defined based on 11 food groups or nutrient components for chronic disease prevention; score ranges 0–110. DASH was defined based on eight food groups or nutrient components for hypertension prevention; score ranges 8–40. For all indices, a higher score is indicative of better diet quality.

  • ‡Type 2 diabetes defined as having fasting plasma glucose ≥126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L) or self-reported use of diabetes medication (including insulin) (n = 557) vs. without type 2 diabetes (n = 356).

  • §Global cognitive function score was calculated by averaging the z scores for each of the 10 cognitive scores. Cognitive function factors were derived through principal components analysis that identified “executive” and “memory” functions.