Association of mental health problems profile and dietary patterns in two extracted classes
| Dietary pattern | High mental health problems class (n=259) | Low mental health problems class (n=2683) | |
| Western | Crude model | 0.131 (0.272) | 0.076 (0.128) |
| Model II | 0.172 (0.239) | 0.119 (0.084) | |
| Model III | 0.158 (0.204) | 0.098 (0.082) | |
| Model IV | 0.148 (0.206) | 0.099 (0.081) | |
| Healthy | Crude model | 0.002 (0.000) | 0.177 (0.884) |
| Model II | −0.711 (0.859) | −0.339 (0.175)* | |
| Model III | −0.772 (0.982) | −0.328 (0.172)* | |
| Model IV | −0.771 (0.890) | −0.341 (0.173)** | |
| Traditional | Crude model | 0.384 (0.384) | 0.378 (0.113)*** |
| Model II | 0.631 (0.397) | 0.550 (0.145)**** | |
| Model III | 0.547 (0.434) | 0.565 (0.149)**** | |
| Model IV | 0.616 (0.413) | 0.567 (0.149)**** | |
All presented values are regression coefficient and its SE, which resulted from one-factor, two-class factor mixture model solution considering ‘type of occupation’ as clusters (higher level units).
Crude model: no adjustment was done for confounding variables.
Model II: adjustment was done for demographic variables, that is, age, gender, marital status, educational level and family size.
Model III: adjustment was done for demographic variables and lifestyles factors, that is, sleep duration, physical activity, body mass index and smoking.
Model IV: adjustment was done for all variables in model III and job-related characteristics, that is, shift work, second job and the effort to reward ratio.
*P<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01, ****p<0.001.