-
Supplementary Table S1 (available in www.besjournal.com) summarizes the patient characteristics in the training and validation sets. There were 2,124 males and 2,485 females (53.92%) in the training set, and 943 males and 1,061 females (52.94%) in the validation set. In our study, the differences between the training and validation sets were not statistically significant, except for race, which suggests that the subjects in these two datasets had similar characteristics (P > 0.05).
Table S1. Characteristics of the participants in training set and validation set
Characteristic Training set (n = 4,609 ) Validation set (n = 2,004) P-value Sex, n (%) 0.455 Males 2,124 (46.08) 943 (47.06) Females 2,485 (53.92) 1,061 (52.94) Age (years), n (%) 0.721 20– 1,809 (39.25) 790 (39.42) 45– 1,149 (24.93) 494 (24.65) 60– 1,134 (24.60) 470 (23.45) ≥ 75 517 (11.22) 250 (12.48) Race/Ethnicity, n (%) 0.009 Mexican American 751 (16.29) 289 (14.42) Other hispanic 535 (11.61) 203 (10.13) Non-hispanic white 2,069 (44.89) 931 (46.46) Non-hispanic black 817 (17.73) 383 (19.11) Other/multiracial 437 (9.48) 198 (9.88) BMI (kg/m2), n (%) 0.166 < 25 1,251 (27.18) 573 (28.64) 25–30 1,531 (33.27) 674 (33.68) ≥ 30 1,820 (39.55) 754 (37.68) Educational level, n (%) 0.182 < High school 1,203 (26.15) 501 (25.00) High school 1,056 (22.95) 441 (22.01) > High school 2,342 (50.90) 1,062 (52.99) Annual household income (CNY), n (%) 0.081 < 20,000 933 (22.21) 408 (21.19) 20,000– 1,614 (36.11) 669 (34.76) 45,000– 850 (19.02) 340 (17.66) ≥ 75,000 1,013 (22.66) 508 (26.39) Smoking status, n (%) 0.446 Yes 1,906 (41.37) 801 (39.97) No 2,701 (58.63) 1,203 (60.03) Vigorous recreational activity, n (%) 0.350 Yes 895 (19.42) 406 (20.26) No 3,714 (80.58) 1,598 (79.74) Hypertension, n (%) 0.455 Yes 2,198 (47.69) 989 (49.35) No 2,411 (52.31) 1,015 (50.65) Diabetes, n (%) 0.362 Yes 981 (21.28) 434 (21.66) No 3,628 (78.72) 1,570 (78.34) Cholesterol, mg/dL 192.63 ± 41.61 193.59 ± 40.98 0.386 Uric Acid, mg/dL 5.45 ± 1.40 5.51 ± 1.44 0.112 High-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 52.26 ± 14.45 52.82 ± 15.35 0.155 Low-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 114.87 ± 35.60 115.39 ± 35.02 0.583 Average energy intake, kcal/day 1,898.36 ± 703.84 1,925.17 ± 696.28 0.153 Total dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal/day 335.31 ± 288.18 330.68 ± 269.25 0.540 Animal-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal/day 127.36 ± 168.10 126.82 ± 183.63 0.907 Plant-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal/day 189.62 ± 231.38 186.58 ± 190.60 0.605 Note. BMI: Body Mass Index, RAEs: retinol activity equivalents. The individuals with NAFLD in the training set included 901 males (52.88%) and 803 females (47.12%) (Table 1). We found that risk predictors such as sex, age, race, BMI, education level, annual household income, smoking status, vigorous recreational activity, hypertension, diabetes, uric acid (UA), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), animal-derived dietary retinol intake, and plant-derived dietary retinol intake showed statistically significant differences between participants with NAFLD and healthy controls in the training set (P < 0.05). Participants with NAFLD tended to be older, were more likely to be Mexican Americans, and had lower educational levels, annual household incomes, vigorous recreational activity levels, and HDL and plant-derived dietary retinol intake than the control group. In addition, participants with NAFLD were more likely to be obese, smokers, have hypertension and diabetes, and have higher levels of serum UA and animal-derived dietary retinol intake than those without NAFLD (P < 0.01).
Table 1. Participant characteristics in training data set by NAFLD status
Characteristics NAFLD P-value No (n = 2,905) Yes (n = 1,704) Sex, n (%) < 0.001 Males 1,223 (42.10) 901 (52.88) Females 1,682 (57.90) 803 (47.12) Age (years), n (%) < 0.001 20– 1,317 (45.34) 492 (28.87) 45– 681 (23.44) 468 (27.46) 60– 606 (20.86) 528 (30.99) ≥ 75 301 (10.36) 216 (12.68) Race/ethnicity, n (%) < 0.001 Mexican American 344 (11.84) 407 (23.88) Other hispanic 328 (11.29) 207 (12.15) Non-hispanic white 1,271 (43.76) 798 (46.84) Non-hispanic black 636 (21.89) 181 (10.62) Other/multiracial 326 (11.22) 111 (6.51) BMI (kg/m2), n (%) < 0.001 < 25 1,172 (40.41) 79 (4.64) 25–30 1,087 (37.48) 444 (26.09) ≥ 30 641 (22.11) 1,179 (69.27) Educational level, n (%) < 0.001 < High school 624 (21.51) 579 (34.06) High school 665 (22.92) 391 (23.00) > High school 1,612 (55.57) 730 (42.94) Annual household income (CNY), n (%) < 0.001 < 20,000 539 (19.40) 394 (24.16) 20,000– 951 (34.22) 663 (40.65) 45,000– 558 (20.08) 292 (17.90) ≥ 75,000 731 (26.30) 282 (17.29) Smoking status, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 1,088 (37.48) 818 (48.00) No 1,815 (62.52) 886 (52.00) Vigorous recreational activity, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 709 (24.41) 186 (10.92) No 2,196 (75.59) 1,518 (89.08) Hypertension, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 1,133 (39.00) 1,065 (62.50) No 1,772 (61.00) 639 (37.50) Diabetes, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 343 (11.81) 638 (37.44) No 2,562 (88.19) 1,066 (62.56) Cholesterol, mg/dL 191.81 ± 41.45 194.03 ± 41.86 0.080 Uric Acid, mg/dL 5.13 ± 1.29 5.99 ± 1.42 < 0.001 High-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 56.00 ± 14.51 45.87 ± 11.91 < 0.001 Low-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 114.76 ± 35.28 115.08 ± 36.17 0.766 Average energy intake, kcal per day 1,892.93 ± 696.32 1,907.61 ± 716.59 0.494 Total dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day 339.77 ± 292.55 327.69 ± 280.49 0.170 Animal-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day 122.52 ± 144.50 135.60 ± 201.85 0.011 Plant-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day 200.37 ± 253.68 171.29 ± 185.98 < 0.001 Note. Continuous variables are represented by mean ± standard deviation (SD). NAFLD: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, BMI: Body Mass Index, RAEs: retinol activity equivalents. -
The predictors of NAFLD risk identified in the logistic regression analysis of the training set are shown in Table 2. In univariate logistic regression models, race (OR = 0.634, 95% CI: 0.588–0.684), vigorous recreational activity (OR = 0.679, 95% CI: 0.540–0.853) and HDL (OR = 0.955, 95% CI: 0.948–0.961) were inversely associated with NAFLD risk. Moreover, there were significant positive correlations between NAFLD risk and the following predictors: age (OR = 1.251, 95% CI: 1.139–1.374), BMI (OR = 4.386, 95% CI: 3.870–4.971), smoking (OR = 1.353, 95% CI: 1.149–1.594), hypertension (OR = 1.546, 95% CI: 1.289–1.855), diabetes (OR = 2.423, 95% CI: 1.985–2.957) and UA (OR = 1.291, 95% CI: 1.212–1.375).
Table 2. Analysis of risk factors for NAFLD using univariate logistic regression model
Variables B SE Wald χ2 P OR (95% CI) Age 0.224 0.048 22.004 < 0.001 1.251 (1.139–1.374) BMI 1.478 0.064 535.961 < 0.001 4.386 (3.870–4.971) Race/ethnicity −0.455 0.038 140.054 < 0.001 0.634 (0.588–0.684) Smoking 0.302 0.084 13.085 < 0.001 1.353 (1.149–1.594) Vigorous recreational activity −0.387 0.117 11.018 0.001 0.679 (0.540–0.853) Hypertension 0.436 0.093 21.982 < 0.001 1.546 (1.289–1.855) Diabetes 0.885 0.102 75.776 < 0.001 2.423 (1.985–2.957) HDL −0.046 0.004 172.778 < 0.001 0.955 (0.948–0.961) Uric Acid 0.256 0.032 63.325 < 0.001 1.291 (1.212–1.375) Note. NAFLD: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, SE: standard error, OR: Odds ratios, CI: confidence intervals, BMI: Body Mass Index, HDL: High-density lipoprotein. The weighted ORs (95% CIs) for NAFLD as a dichotomous outcome based on the quartiles of total dietary retinol intake, animal-, and plant-derived dietary retinol intake are shown in Table 3. In the table, outcomes are given as classified variables (quartiles) for total dietary retinol intake, animal-derived dietary retinol intake, and plant-derived dietary retinol intake due to evidence of nonlinearity in some situations. Nevertheless, the P-value for the trend computed from the models was included in our analyses, which included dietary retinol as a reference for continuous exposure. In univariate logistic regression models, we found that the ORs (95% CIs) of NAFLD for the highest quartile of plant-derived dietary retinol intake (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57–0.99) were inversely associated with NAFLD risk compared to the lowest quartile of intake by adjusting for confounding factors such as sex, age, race, education level, smoking status, recreational activities, income level, hypertension, diabetes, BMI, LDL, UA and TC (model 2).
Table 3. Weighted ORs and 95% CIs for NAFLD according to dietary retinol intake quartile (μg /1,000 kcal per day) using the univariate logistic regression model
Variables Crude OR (95% CI) P-trend Model 1 OR (95% CI) P-trend Model 2 OR (95% CI) P-trend Total dietary retinol intake
(RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day)0.005 0.001 0.176 < 190.54 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 190.54–284.02 1.11 (0.89–1.38) 1.02 (0.81–1.28) 1.10 (0.80–1.51) 284.02–422.22 1.12 (0.94–1.34) 1.01 (0.82–1.25) 1.03 (0.79–1.34) ≥ 422.22 0.79 (0.66–0.95)* 0.70 (0.57–0.87)** 0.86 (0.65–1.15) Animal-derived dietary retinol
intake (RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day)0.339 0.853 0.559 < 59.37 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 59.37–105.57 1.04 (0.83–1.29) 0.97 (0.78–1.19) 1.03 (0.80–1.33) 105.57–165.14 1.33 (1.07–1.67)* 1.25 (1.00–1.56)* 1.21 (0.90–1.61) ≥ 165.14 1.07 (0.85–1.36) 0.98 (0.76–1.26) 0.90 (0.63–1.26) Plant-derived dietary retinol intake
(RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day)< 0.001 < 0.001 0.042 < 70.22 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 70.22–135.01 0.89 (0.73–1.09) 0.89 (0.72–1.10) 0.95 (0.72–1.27) 135.01–253.74 0.84 (0.67–1.05) 0.81 (0.64–1.04) 0.91 (0.67–1.24) ≥ 253.74 0.64 (0.50–0.82)** 0.60 (0.46–0.79)** 0.75 (0.57–0.99)* Note. Model 1 is adjusted for sex and age. Model 2 was adjusted for sex, age, race, education level, smoking status, physical activity, income level, hypertension, diabetes, BMI, LDL, UA, and TC levels. The lowest dietary retinol intake quartile was used as the reference group. The results are survey-weighted. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. Tests for trends based on variables containing median values for each quartile. NAFLD: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, OR: Odds ratios, CI: confidence intervals, RAEs: retinol activity equivalents. -
An ANN model was established based on the NAFLD risk predictors obtained from the logistic regression analysis. The input variables for the ANN model included age, race, BMI, smoking status, recreational activities, hypertension, diabetes, HDL, UA, and plant-derived dietary retinol intake. The output variable is a binary variable indicating whether an individual has NAFLD. The structure of the BP neural network consists of three layers (Figure 2). These parameters were selected based on previous studies[36,37]. We set the training parameters (e.g., learning rate and momentum) to their default values. The Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm was used as the training function. The neural network was trained for over 100 epochs. It is usually optimal to remove 20% of the input units and 50% of the hidden units because this simple method can prevent the overfitting of neural networks[60]. To ensure that the output was not heavily skewed toward the dominant class, each data point was weighted according to its outcome ratio. The ANN model corresponding to the prediction variable, which was the probability of having NAFLD, had 10 neurons in the input layer, seven neurons in the hidden layer, and one neuron in the output layer.
-
Figure 3 shows the areas under the ROC curves for the training and validation sets of the ANN model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.874 and 0.883 for the training and validation sets, respectively. Therefore, a well-trained ANN model with high accuracy and large AUC can successfully predict the individual risk of NAFLD. The cutoff values of the incidence probability of NAFLD were 0.388 in the training set and 0.427 in the validation set, indicating that NAFLD will occur when the probability of incidence is greater than 0.388.
Figure 3. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves obtained from the artificial neural network (ANN) model in training and test sets. AUC: area under the curve.
Table 4 shows that the accuracy indices of the training set and validation set are 0.807 and 0.800 for the ANN, respectively. The Se, Sp, and Youden index of the training set and validation set were 0.804, 0.785, and 0.589 and 0.793, 0.829, and 0.622 for the ANN, respectively. The AUC of the ANN model were 0.874 for the training set and 0.883 for the validation set. The accuracy, Se, Sp, Youden index and AUC values were 0.798, 0.697, 0.856, 0.553 and 0.871 for logistic regression, respectively. So, the ability of the ANN to predict the risk of NAFLD was significantly greater than that of logistic regression model.
Table 4. The performance of artificial neural network (ANN) and logistic model
Indicator ANN Logistic regression Training set (n = 4,609) Validation set (n = 2,004) Accuracy 0.807 0.800 0.798 Sensitivity 0.804 0.793 0.697 Specificity 0.785 0.829 0.856 Yuden index 0.589 0.622 0.553 AUC (95% CI) 0.874 (0.864–0.884) 0.883 (0.868–0.898) 0.871 (0.861–0.881) Note. ANN: artificial neural network, AUC: area under the curve.
doi: 10.3967/bes2023.120
An Artificial Neural Network Model Combined with Dietary Retinol Intake from Different Sources to Predict the Risk of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
-
Abstract:
Objective This study aimed to develop an artificial neural network (ANN) model combined with dietary retinol intake from different sources to predict the risk of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in American adults. Methods Data from the 2007 to 2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007–2014 were analyzed. Eligible subjects (n = 6,613) were randomly divided into a training set (n1 = 4,609) and a validation set (n2 = 2,004) at a ratio of 7:3. The training set was used to identify predictors of NAFLD risk using logistic regression analysis. An ANN was established to predict the NAFLD risk using a training set. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate the accuracy of the model using the training and validation sets. Results Our study found that the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of NAFLD for the highest quartile of plant-derived dietary retinol intake (i.e., provitamin A carotenoids, such as β-carotene) (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.99) were inversely associated with NAFLD risk, compared to the lowest quartile of intake, after adjusting for potential confounders. The areas under the ROC curves were 0.874 and 0.883 for the training and validation sets, respectively. NAFLD occurs when its incidence probability is greater than 0.388. Conclusion The ANN model combined with plant-derived dietary retinol intake showed a significant effect on NAFLD. This could be applied to predict NAFLD risk in the American adult population when government departments formulate future health plans. -
Key words:
- NAFLD /
- Plant-derived dietary retinol intake /
- ANN /
- Prediction model /
- NHANES
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
The participants provided written informed consent for the publication of potentially identifiable images or data.
注释:1) AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS: 2) CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: 3) ETHICS STATEMENT: -
S1. Characteristics of the participants in training set and validation set
Characteristic Training set (n = 4,609 ) Validation set (n = 2,004) P-value Sex, n (%) 0.455 Males 2,124 (46.08) 943 (47.06) Females 2,485 (53.92) 1,061 (52.94) Age (years), n (%) 0.721 20– 1,809 (39.25) 790 (39.42) 45– 1,149 (24.93) 494 (24.65) 60– 1,134 (24.60) 470 (23.45) ≥ 75 517 (11.22) 250 (12.48) Race/Ethnicity, n (%) 0.009 Mexican American 751 (16.29) 289 (14.42) Other hispanic 535 (11.61) 203 (10.13) Non-hispanic white 2,069 (44.89) 931 (46.46) Non-hispanic black 817 (17.73) 383 (19.11) Other/multiracial 437 (9.48) 198 (9.88) BMI (kg/m2), n (%) 0.166 < 25 1,251 (27.18) 573 (28.64) 25–30 1,531 (33.27) 674 (33.68) ≥ 30 1,820 (39.55) 754 (37.68) Educational level, n (%) 0.182 < High school 1,203 (26.15) 501 (25.00) High school 1,056 (22.95) 441 (22.01) > High school 2,342 (50.90) 1,062 (52.99) Annual household income (CNY), n (%) 0.081 < 20,000 933 (22.21) 408 (21.19) 20,000– 1,614 (36.11) 669 (34.76) 45,000– 850 (19.02) 340 (17.66) ≥ 75,000 1,013 (22.66) 508 (26.39) Smoking status, n (%) 0.446 Yes 1,906 (41.37) 801 (39.97) No 2,701 (58.63) 1,203 (60.03) Vigorous recreational activity, n (%) 0.350 Yes 895 (19.42) 406 (20.26) No 3,714 (80.58) 1,598 (79.74) Hypertension, n (%) 0.455 Yes 2,198 (47.69) 989 (49.35) No 2,411 (52.31) 1,015 (50.65) Diabetes, n (%) 0.362 Yes 981 (21.28) 434 (21.66) No 3,628 (78.72) 1,570 (78.34) Cholesterol, mg/dL 192.63 ± 41.61 193.59 ± 40.98 0.386 Uric Acid, mg/dL 5.45 ± 1.40 5.51 ± 1.44 0.112 High-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 52.26 ± 14.45 52.82 ± 15.35 0.155 Low-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 114.87 ± 35.60 115.39 ± 35.02 0.583 Average energy intake, kcal/day 1,898.36 ± 703.84 1,925.17 ± 696.28 0.153 Total dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal/day 335.31 ± 288.18 330.68 ± 269.25 0.540 Animal-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal/day 127.36 ± 168.10 126.82 ± 183.63 0.907 Plant-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal/day 189.62 ± 231.38 186.58 ± 190.60 0.605 Note. BMI: Body Mass Index, RAEs: retinol activity equivalents. Table 1. Participant characteristics in training data set by NAFLD status
Characteristics NAFLD P-value No (n = 2,905) Yes (n = 1,704) Sex, n (%) < 0.001 Males 1,223 (42.10) 901 (52.88) Females 1,682 (57.90) 803 (47.12) Age (years), n (%) < 0.001 20– 1,317 (45.34) 492 (28.87) 45– 681 (23.44) 468 (27.46) 60– 606 (20.86) 528 (30.99) ≥ 75 301 (10.36) 216 (12.68) Race/ethnicity, n (%) < 0.001 Mexican American 344 (11.84) 407 (23.88) Other hispanic 328 (11.29) 207 (12.15) Non-hispanic white 1,271 (43.76) 798 (46.84) Non-hispanic black 636 (21.89) 181 (10.62) Other/multiracial 326 (11.22) 111 (6.51) BMI (kg/m2), n (%) < 0.001 < 25 1,172 (40.41) 79 (4.64) 25–30 1,087 (37.48) 444 (26.09) ≥ 30 641 (22.11) 1,179 (69.27) Educational level, n (%) < 0.001 < High school 624 (21.51) 579 (34.06) High school 665 (22.92) 391 (23.00) > High school 1,612 (55.57) 730 (42.94) Annual household income (CNY), n (%) < 0.001 < 20,000 539 (19.40) 394 (24.16) 20,000– 951 (34.22) 663 (40.65) 45,000– 558 (20.08) 292 (17.90) ≥ 75,000 731 (26.30) 282 (17.29) Smoking status, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 1,088 (37.48) 818 (48.00) No 1,815 (62.52) 886 (52.00) Vigorous recreational activity, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 709 (24.41) 186 (10.92) No 2,196 (75.59) 1,518 (89.08) Hypertension, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 1,133 (39.00) 1,065 (62.50) No 1,772 (61.00) 639 (37.50) Diabetes, n (%) < 0.001 Yes 343 (11.81) 638 (37.44) No 2,562 (88.19) 1,066 (62.56) Cholesterol, mg/dL 191.81 ± 41.45 194.03 ± 41.86 0.080 Uric Acid, mg/dL 5.13 ± 1.29 5.99 ± 1.42 < 0.001 High-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 56.00 ± 14.51 45.87 ± 11.91 < 0.001 Low-density lipoprotein, mg/dL 114.76 ± 35.28 115.08 ± 36.17 0.766 Average energy intake, kcal per day 1,892.93 ± 696.32 1,907.61 ± 716.59 0.494 Total dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day 339.77 ± 292.55 327.69 ± 280.49 0.170 Animal-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day 122.52 ± 144.50 135.60 ± 201.85 0.011 Plant-derived dietary retinol intake, RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day 200.37 ± 253.68 171.29 ± 185.98 < 0.001 Note. Continuous variables are represented by mean ± standard deviation (SD). NAFLD: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, BMI: Body Mass Index, RAEs: retinol activity equivalents. Table 2. Analysis of risk factors for NAFLD using univariate logistic regression model
Variables B SE Wald χ2 P OR (95% CI) Age 0.224 0.048 22.004 < 0.001 1.251 (1.139–1.374) BMI 1.478 0.064 535.961 < 0.001 4.386 (3.870–4.971) Race/ethnicity −0.455 0.038 140.054 < 0.001 0.634 (0.588–0.684) Smoking 0.302 0.084 13.085 < 0.001 1.353 (1.149–1.594) Vigorous recreational activity −0.387 0.117 11.018 0.001 0.679 (0.540–0.853) Hypertension 0.436 0.093 21.982 < 0.001 1.546 (1.289–1.855) Diabetes 0.885 0.102 75.776 < 0.001 2.423 (1.985–2.957) HDL −0.046 0.004 172.778 < 0.001 0.955 (0.948–0.961) Uric Acid 0.256 0.032 63.325 < 0.001 1.291 (1.212–1.375) Note. NAFLD: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, SE: standard error, OR: Odds ratios, CI: confidence intervals, BMI: Body Mass Index, HDL: High-density lipoprotein. Table 3. Weighted ORs and 95% CIs for NAFLD according to dietary retinol intake quartile (μg /1,000 kcal per day) using the univariate logistic regression model
Variables Crude OR (95% CI) P-trend Model 1 OR (95% CI) P-trend Model 2 OR (95% CI) P-trend Total dietary retinol intake
(RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day)0.005 0.001 0.176 < 190.54 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 190.54–284.02 1.11 (0.89–1.38) 1.02 (0.81–1.28) 1.10 (0.80–1.51) 284.02–422.22 1.12 (0.94–1.34) 1.01 (0.82–1.25) 1.03 (0.79–1.34) ≥ 422.22 0.79 (0.66–0.95)* 0.70 (0.57–0.87)** 0.86 (0.65–1.15) Animal-derived dietary retinol
intake (RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day)0.339 0.853 0.559 < 59.37 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 59.37–105.57 1.04 (0.83–1.29) 0.97 (0.78–1.19) 1.03 (0.80–1.33) 105.57–165.14 1.33 (1.07–1.67)* 1.25 (1.00–1.56)* 1.21 (0.90–1.61) ≥ 165.14 1.07 (0.85–1.36) 0.98 (0.76–1.26) 0.90 (0.63–1.26) Plant-derived dietary retinol intake
(RAEs, μg/1,000 kcal per day)< 0.001 < 0.001 0.042 < 70.22 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 1.00 (ref.) 70.22–135.01 0.89 (0.73–1.09) 0.89 (0.72–1.10) 0.95 (0.72–1.27) 135.01–253.74 0.84 (0.67–1.05) 0.81 (0.64–1.04) 0.91 (0.67–1.24) ≥ 253.74 0.64 (0.50–0.82)** 0.60 (0.46–0.79)** 0.75 (0.57–0.99)* Note. Model 1 is adjusted for sex and age. Model 2 was adjusted for sex, age, race, education level, smoking status, physical activity, income level, hypertension, diabetes, BMI, LDL, UA, and TC levels. The lowest dietary retinol intake quartile was used as the reference group. The results are survey-weighted. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01. Tests for trends based on variables containing median values for each quartile. NAFLD: non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, OR: Odds ratios, CI: confidence intervals, RAEs: retinol activity equivalents. Table 4. The performance of artificial neural network (ANN) and logistic model
Indicator ANN Logistic regression Training set (n = 4,609) Validation set (n = 2,004) Accuracy 0.807 0.800 0.798 Sensitivity 0.804 0.793 0.697 Specificity 0.785 0.829 0.856 Yuden index 0.589 0.622 0.553 AUC (95% CI) 0.874 (0.864–0.884) 0.883 (0.868–0.898) 0.871 (0.861–0.881) Note. ANN: artificial neural network, AUC: area under the curve. -
[1] Angulo P. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. N Engl J Med, 2002; 346, 1221−31. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra011775 [2] Vadarlis A, Antza C, Bakaloudi DR, et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: The effect of vitamin E supplementation in adult patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021; 36, 311−9. doi: 10.1111/jgh.15221 [3] Afzali N, Ebadi SS, Afzali H, et al. Effect of Beta vulgaris extract on liver enzymes in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomized clinical trial. Hepat Mon, 2020; 20, e102125. [4] Younossi Z, Anstee QM, Marietti M, et al. Global burden of NAFLD and NASH: trends, predictions, risk factors and prevention. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018; 15, 11−20. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2017.109 [5] Estes C, Razavi H, Loomba R, et al. Modeling the epidemic of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease demonstrates an exponential increase in burden of disease. Hepatology, 2018; 67, 123−33. doi: 10.1002/hep.29466 [6] Li HP, Gu YQ, Wu XH, et al. Association between consumption of edible seaweeds and newly diagnosed non-alcohol fatty liver disease: The TCLSIH Cohort Study. Liver Int, 2021; 41, 311−20. doi: 10.1111/liv.14655 [7] Younossi ZM, Henry L. The impact of obesity and type 2 diabetes on chronic liver disease. Am J Gastroenterol, 2019; 114, 1714−5. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000433 [8] Targher G, Byrne CD, Lonardo A, et al. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and risk of incident cardiovascular disease: A meta-analysis. J Hepatol, 2016; 65, 589−600. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2016.05.013 [9] Lotfi A, Saneei P, Hekmatdost A, et al. The relationship between dietary antioxidant intake and physical activity rate with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD): A case - Control study. Clin Nutr ESPEN, 2019; 34, 45−9. doi: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2019.09.004 [10] Le MH, Devaki P, Ha NB, et al. Prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and risk factors for advanced fibrosis and mortality in the United States. PLoS One, 2017; 12, e0173499. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173499 [11] Rinella ME, Loomba R, Caldwell SH, et al. Controversies in the diagnosis and management of NAFLD and NASH. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y), 2014; 10, 219−27. [12] Pietu F, Guillaud O, Walter T, et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid with vitamin E in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: long-term results. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol, 2012; 36, 146−55. doi: 10.1016/j.clinre.2011.10.011 [13] Sun YY, Sun JP, Zhang PP, et al. Association of dietary fiber intake with hyperuricemia in U. S. adults. Food Funct, 2019; 10, 4932−40. doi: 10.1039/C8FO01917G [14] Buil-Cosiales P, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Ruiz-Canela M, et al. Consumption of fruit or fiber-fruit decreases the risk of cardiovascular disease in a mediterranean young cohort. Nutrients, 2017; 9, 295. doi: 10.3390/nu9030295 [15] Yao BD, Fang H, Xu WH, et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk of type 2 diabetes: a dose-response analysis of prospective studies. Eur J Epidemiol, 2014; 29, 79−88. doi: 10.1007/s10654-013-9876-x [16] Sun BQ, Shi XY, Wang T, et al. Exploration of the association between dietary fiber intake and hypertension among U. S. adults using 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood pressure guidelines: NHANES 2007⁻2014. Nutrients, 2018; 10, 1091. doi: 10.3390/nu10081091 [17] Kranz S, Dodd KW, Juan WY, et al. Whole grains contribute only a small proportion of dietary fiber to the U. S. diet. Nutrients, 2017; 9, 153. doi: 10.3390/nu9020153 [18] Mollard RC, Sénéchal M, MacIntosh AC, et al. Dietary determinants of hepatic steatosis and visceral adiposity in overweight and obese youth at risk of type 2 diabetes. Am J Clin Nutr, 2014; 99, 804−12. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.079277 [19] Ouyang XS, Cirillo P, Sautin Y, et al. Fructose consumption as a risk factor for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Hepatol, 2008; 48, 993−9. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2008.02.011 [20] Shim P, Choi D, Park Y. Association of blood fatty acid composition and dietary pattern with the risk of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in patients who underwent cholecystectomy. Ann Nutr Metab, 2017; 70, 303−11. doi: 10.1159/000475605 [21] Dorosti M, Jafary Heidarloo A, Bakhshimoghaddam F, et al. Whole-grain consumption and its effects on hepatic steatosis and liver enzymes in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomised controlled clinical trial. Br J Nutr, 2020; 123, 328−36. doi: 10.1017/S0007114519002769 [22] Koutnikova H, Genser B, Monteiro-Sepulveda M, et al. Impact of bacterial probiotics on obesity, diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease related variables: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ Open, 2019; 9, e017995. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017995 [23] Maleki Z, Jazayeri S, Eslami O, et al. Effect of soy milk consumption on glycemic status, blood pressure, fibrinogen and malondialdehyde in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomized controlled trial. Complement Ther Med, 2019; 44, 44−50. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2019.02.020 [24] Al-Busafi SA, Bhat M, Wong P, et al. Antioxidant therapy in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Hepat Res Treat, 2012; 2012, 947575. [25] Pickett-Blakely O, Young K, Carr RM. Micronutrients in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease pathogenesis. Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018; 6, 451−62. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2018.07.004 [26] USDA, ARS. What we eat in America, NHANES 2009-2010. http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12355000/pdf/0910/Table_1_NIN_GEN_09.pdf. [2011-02-23 [27] Reboul E. Absorption of vitamin A and carotenoids by the enterocyte: focus on transport proteins. Nutrients, 2013; 5, 3563−81. doi: 10.3390/nu5093563 [28] Hollander D, Muralidhara KS. Vitamin A1 intestinal absorption in vivo: influence of luminal factors on transport. Am J Physiol, 1977; 232, E471−7. [29] Hollander D, Ruble PE Jr. beta-carotene intestinal absorption: bile, fatty acid, pH, and flow rate effects on transport. Am J Physiol, 1978; 235, E686−91. [30] Hollander D. Intestinal absorption of vitamins A, E, D, and K. J Lab Clin Med, 1981; 97, 449−62. [31] Yilmaz B, Sahin K, Bilen H, et al. Carotenoids and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr, 2015; 4, 161−71. [32] Lim HS, Choi J, Lee B, et al. Association between inflammatory biomarkers and nutritional status in fatty liver. Clin Nutr Res, 2020; 9, 182−94. doi: 10.7762/cnr.2020.9.3.182 [33] Vahid F, Rahmani D, Hekmatdoost A. The association between dietary antioxidant index (DAI) and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) onset; new findings from an incident case-control study. Clin Nutr ESPEN, 2021; 41, 360−4. doi: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.10.020 [34] Ma CF, Liu YW, He SL, et al. Negative association between antioxidant vitamin intake and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in Chinese non-diabetic adults: mediation models involving superoxide dismutase. Free Radic Res, 2020; 54, 670−7. doi: 10.1080/10715762.2020.1825705 [35] Coelho JM, Cansanção K, de Mello Perez R, et al. Association between serum and dietary antioxidant micronutrients and advanced liver fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: an observational study. PeerJ, 2020; 8, e9838. doi: 10.7717/peerj.9838 [36] Disse E, Ledoux S, Bétry C, et al. An artificial neural network to predict resting energy expenditure in obesity. Clin Nutr, 2018; 37, 1661−9. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2017.07.017 [37] Aghamaleki FS, Mollashahi B, Nosrati M, et al. Application of an artificial neural network in the diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cureus, 2019; 11, e4004. [38] Raghupathi V, Raghupathi W. Preventive healthcare: A neural network analysis of behavioral habits and chronic diseases. Healthcare (Basel), 2017; 5, 8. [39] Fernández-Granero MA, Sánchez-Morillo D, León-Jiménez A, et al. Automatic prediction of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations through home telemonitoring of symptoms. Biomed Mater Eng, 2014; 24, 3825−32. [40] Carlucci D, Renna P, Schiuma G. Evaluating service quality dimensions as antecedents to outpatient satisfaction using back propagation neural network. Health Care Manag Sci, 2013; 16, 37−44. doi: 10.1007/s10729-012-9211-1 [41] Zeng J, Zhang JG, Li ZY, et al. Prediction model of artificial neural network for the risk of hyperuricemia incorporating dietary risk factors in a Chinese adult study. Food Nutr Res, 2020; 64, 3712. [42] Xu M, Wong TC, Chin KS. Modeling daily patient arrivals at Emergency Department and quantifying the relative importance of contributing variables using artificial neural network. Decis Support Syst, 2013; 54, 1488−98. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2012.12.019 [43] NCHS. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm. [2022-08-26 [44] Zipf G, Chiappa M, Porter KS, et al. National health and nutrition examination survey: plan and operations, 1999-2010. Vital Health Stat 1, 2013; 1–37. [45] Choi WJ, Ford ES, Curhan G, et al. Independent association of serum retinol and β-carotene levels with hyperuricemia: A national population study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 2012; 64, 389−96. [46] Zhai TY, Chen Q, Xu J, et al. Prevalence and trends in low bone density, osteopenia and osteoporosis in U. S. adults with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, 2005-2014. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne), 2022; 12, 825448. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.825448 [47] Ruhl CE, Everhart JE. Fatty liver indices in the multiethnic United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2015; 41, 65−76. doi: 10.1111/apt.13012 [48] Kim D, Kim W, Adejumo AC, et al. Race/ethnicity-based temporal changes in prevalence of NAFLD-related advanced fibrosis in the United States, 2005-2016. Hepatol Int, 2019; 13, 205−13. doi: 10.1007/s12072-018-09926-z [49] Kim D, Yoo ER, Li AA, et al. Depression is associated with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease among adults in the United States. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2019; 50, 590−8. doi: 10.1111/apt.15395 [50] Meffert PJ, Baumeister SE, Lerch MM, et al. Development, external validation, and comparative assessment of a new diagnostic score for hepatic steatosis. Am J Gastroenterol, 2014; 109, 1404−14. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.155 [51] Zhang PP, Sun JP, Guo Y, et al. Association between retinol intake and hyperuricaemia in adults. Public Health Nutr, 2021; 24, 2205−14. doi: 10.1017/S1368980020000324 [52] Menke A, Casagrande S, Geiss L, et al. Prevalence of and trends in diabetes among adults in the United States, 1988-2012. JAMA, 2015; 314, 1021−9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.10029 [53] Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA guideline for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines. Hypertension, 2018; 71, e13−115. [54] Hearty ÁP, Gibney MJ. Analysis of meal patterns with the use of supervised data mining techniques--artificial neural networks and decision trees. Am J Clin Nutr, 2008; 88, 1632−42. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2008.26619 [55] Gupta H, Gupta PK, Fang X, et al. Development and validation of a risk calculator predicting postoperative respiratory failure. Chest, 2011; 140, 1207−15. doi: 10.1378/chest.11-0466 [56] Mukamal KJ, Ding EL, Djoussé L. Alcohol consumption, physical activity, and chronic disease risk factors: a population-based cross-sectional survey. BMC Public Health, 2006; 6, 118. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-118 [57] Montie JE, Wei JT. Artificial neural networks for prostate carcinoma risk assessment. An overview. Cancer, 2001; 91, 1647−52. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010415)91:8+<1647::AID-CNCR1178>3.0.CO;2-3 [58] Grossi E. How artificial intelligence tools can be used to assess individual patient risk in cardiovascular disease: problems with the current methods. BMC Cardiovasc Disord, 2006; 6, 20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-6-20 [59] Florkowski CM. Sensitivity, specificity, receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves and likelihood ratios: communicating the performance of diagnostic tests. Clin Biochem Rev, 2008; 29 Suppl 1, S83-7. [60] Defernez M, Kemsley EK. Avoiding overfitting in the analysis of high-dimensional data with artificial neural networks (ANNs). Analyst, 1999; 124, 1675−81. doi: 10.1039/A905556H [61] Federico A, Dallio M, Caprio GG, et al. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of dietary intake in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Nutrients, 2017; 9, 1074. doi: 10.3390/nu9101074 [62] Mecocci P, Polidori MC, Troiano L, et al. Plasma antioxidants and longevity: a study on healthy centenarians. Free Radic Biol Med, 2000; 28, 1243−8. doi: 10.1016/S0891-5849(00)00246-X [63] Edwards AJ, You CS, Swanson JE, et al. A novel extrinsic reference method for assessing the vitamin A value of plant foods. Am J Clin Nutr, 2001; 74, 348−55. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/74.3.348 [64] Yeum KJ, Russell RM. Carotenoid bioavailability and bioconversion. Annu Rev Nutr, 2002; 22, 483−504. doi: 10.1146/annurev.nutr.22.010402.102834 [65] Hickenbottom SJ, Follett JR, Lin YM, et al. Variability in conversion of β-carotene to vitamin A in men as measured by using a double-tracer study design. Am J Clin Nutr, 2002; 75, 900−7. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/75.5.900 [66] Ni YH, Nagashimada M, Zhan LL, et al. Prevention and reversal of lipotoxicity-induced hepatic insulin resistance and steatohepatitis in mice by an antioxidant carotenoid, β-cryptoxanthin. Endocrinology, 2015; 156, 987−99. doi: 10.1210/en.2014-1776 [67] Elvira-Torales LI, García-Alonso J, Periago-Castón MJ. Nutritional importance of carotenoids and their effect on liver health: A review. Antioxidants (Basel), 2019; 8, 229. doi: 10.3390/antiox8070229 [68] Christensen K, Lawler T, Mares J. Dietary carotenoids and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease among US adults, NHANES 2003-2014. Nutrients, 2019; 11, 1101. doi: 10.3390/nu11051101 [69] Yoneda M, Mawatari H, Fujita K, et al. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein is an independent clinical feature of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and also of the severity of fibrosis in NASH. J Gastroenterol, 2007; 42, 573−82. doi: 10.1007/s00535-007-2060-x [70] Abe RAM, Masroor A, Khorochkov A, et al. The role of vitamins in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review. Cureus, 2021; 13, e16855. [71] Shih PH, Shiue SJ, Chen CN, et al. Fucoidan and fucoxanthin attenuate hepatic steatosis and inflammation of NAFLD through modulation of leptin/adiponectin axis. Mar Drugs, 2021; 19, 148. doi: 10.3390/md19030148 [72] Iwaki M, Matsuda M, Maeda N, et al. Induction of adiponectin, a fat-derived antidiabetic and antiatherogenic factor, by nuclear receptors. Diabetes, 2003; 52, 1655−63. doi: 10.2337/diabetes.52.7.1655 [73] Cimini FA, Barchetta I, Carotti S, et al. Relationship between adipose tissue dysfunction, vitamin D deficiency and the pathogenesis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. World J Gastroenterol, 2017; 23, 3407−17. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i19.3407 -
23060+Supplementary Materials.pdf