Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of incident of type 2 diabetes: results from the consortium on health and ageing network of cohorts in Europe and the United States (CHANCES)

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: There is limited information to support definitive recommendations concerning the role of diet in the development of type 2 Diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The results of the latest meta-analyses suggest that an increased consumption of green leafy vegetables may reduce the incidence of diabetes, with either no association or weak associations demonstrated for total fruit and vegetable intake. Few studies have, however, focused on older subjects.

SUBJECTS/METHODS: The relationship between T2DM and fruit and vegetable intake was investigated using data from the NIH-AARP study and the EPIC Elderly study. All participants below the age of 50 and/or with a history of cancer, diabetes or coronary heart disease were excluded from the analysis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the odds ratio of T2DM comparing the highest with the lowest estimated portions of fruit, vegetable, green leafy vegetables and cabbage intake.

RESULTS: Comparing people with the highest and lowest estimated portions of fruit, vegetable or green leafy vegetable intake indicated no association with the risk of T2DM. However, although the pooled OR across all studies showed no effect overall, there was significant heterogeneity across cohorts and independent results from the NIH-AARP study showed that fruit and green leafy vegetable intake was associated with a reduced risk of T2DM OR 0.95 (95% CI 0.91,0.99) and OR 0.87 (95% CI 0.87,0.90) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Fruit and vegetable intake was not shown to be related to incident T2DM in older subjects. Summary analysis also found no associations between green leafy vegetable and cabbage intake and the onset of T2DM. Future dietary pattern studies may shed light on the origin of the heterogeneity across populations.European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 17 August 2016; 

The effect of changing the built environment on physical activity: a quantitative review of the risk of bias in natural experiments.

BACKGROUND:
Evidence regarding the association of the built environment with physical activity is influencing policy recommendations that advocate changing the built environment to increase population-level physical activity. However, to date there has been no rigorous appraisal of the quality of the evidence on the effects of changing the built environment. The aim of this review was to conduct a thorough quantitative appraisal of the risk of bias present in those natural experiments with the strongest experimental designs for assessing the causal effects of the built environment on physical activity.

METHODS:
Eligible studies had to evaluate the effects of changing the built environment on physical activity, include at least one measurement before and one measurement of physical activity after changes in the environment, and have at least one intervention site and non-intervention comparison site. Given the large number of systematic reviews in this area, studies were identified from three exemplar systematic reviews; these were published in the past five years and were selected to provide a range of different built environment interventions. The risk of bias in these studies was analysed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool: for Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ACROBAT-NRSI).

RESULTS:
Twelve eligible natural experiments were identified. Risk of bias assessments were conducted for each physical activity outcome from all studies, resulting in a total of fifteen outcomes being analysed. Intervention sites included parks, urban greenways/trails, bicycle lanes, paths, vacant lots, and a senior citizen's centre. All outcomes had an overall critical (n = 12) or serious (n = 3) risk of bias. Domains with the highest risk of bias were confounding (due to inadequate control sites and poor control of confounding variables), measurement of outcomes, and selection of the reported result.

CONCLUSIONS:
The present review focused on the strongest natural experiments conducted to date. Given this, the failure of existing studies to adequately control for potential sources of bias highlights the need for more rigorous research to underpin policy recommendations for changing the built environment to increase physical activity. Suggestions are proposed for how future natural experiments in this area can be improved.