ArticlePloS one2024
Association between diet quality and all-cause mortality in a large Dutch cohort.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The hidden costs of Dutch dietary choices: quantifying the health and environmental costs attributable to suboptimal diets.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food-based dietary guidelines are helpful for governments and health agencies to encourage healthy eating at the population level. In order to assess adherence to such guidelines, index scores have been developed, the version in the Netherlands being the Dutch Healthy Diet-index (2015) (DHD2015-index), which reflect adherence to the 2015 Dutch dietary guidelines. Because a higher diet quality, i.e. a higher adherence to the dietary guidelines, is associated with better health outcomes, a higher DHD2015-index score would also mean better outcomes on measures of health, such as all-cause mortality. The present study aimed to elucidate this by investigating the association between DHD2015-index score and mortality in the Dutch population using data from 97 999 participants in the Lifelines cohort study. For the analyses, Cox Proportional Hazards regression was used, whilst accounting for age, sex, physiological measurements, exercise, and biochemical and lifestyle variables. There was a strong negative association between DHD2015-index score and mortality. Hazard ratios for DHD2015-index scores below 60 were approximately 1.2x larger than the mean. Every 10 unit increase in DHD2015-index scores between 60 and 90 led to a 0.1 reduction in hazard ratio, and every 10 unit increase between 90 and the highest DHD2015-index scores led to a reduction in hazard ratios of 0.05. The hazard ratio for the lowest quartile of DHD2015-index scores was 1.14 (95% CI = 1.04-1.26), whereas that for the highest quartile was 0.88 (95% CI = 0.84-0.92). Our results show a clear inverse relationship between DHD2015-index score and all-cause mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.