American journal of ophthalmology · 2025
Association Between Visceral Fat Metabolism Score and Cataract Risk in US Adults: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999 to 2008.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Guo Wen, Xue Hongfei, Li Qing, Wen Zimu, Zhou Zhihuan, Dong Yujun, He Meiqin, Li Yankai, Li Fangfei, Tong Yi
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The present work focused on investigating the relation of visceral fat metabolic score (METS-VF) with cataract prevalence among the American adults.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional study.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study, based on the U.S. population, used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) conducted between 1999 and 2008. For assessing the association of METS-VF with cataract, we employed multivariable logistic regression analysis, subgroup analyses, and restricted cubic splines (RCS) analysis for exploring their relation. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to compare the cataract diagnostic abilities of METS-VF, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR).
RESULTS: There were altogether 2,730 participants included, of whom 290 had cataract.METS-VF was significantly related to cataract (P < .001). As METS-VF quartiles increased, cataract prevalence also increased (Q1: 1.90%, Q2: 6.74%, Q3: 10.25%, Q4: 23.61%). After adjusting for all variables, METS-VF still showed positive relation to cataract prevalence (odds ratio (OR) = 3.14, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.67, 5.93). Subgroup analysis revealed a consistent relationship between METS-VF and cataracts across different groups. The RCS results showed that there was no significant nonlinear relationship between METS-VF and cataracts (P-non-linear = 0.209). ROC curve analysis showed that METS-VF outperformed BMI, WC, and WHtR in cataract prediction.
CONCLUSION: METS-VF is significantly positively related to a higher cataract prevalence, and this relationship remains robust across various subgroups. Additionally, METS-VF demonstrates a stronger predictive ability for cataract than BMI, WC, and WHtR.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional study.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study, based on the U.S. population, used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) conducted between 1999 and 2008. For assessing the association of METS-VF with cataract, we employed multivariable logistic regression analysis, subgroup analyses, and restricted cubic splines (RCS) analysis for exploring their relation. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to compare the cataract diagnostic abilities of METS-VF, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR).
RESULTS: There were altogether 2,730 participants included, of whom 290 had cataract.METS-VF was significantly related to cataract (P < .001). As METS-VF quartiles increased, cataract prevalence also increased (Q1: 1.90%, Q2: 6.74%, Q3: 10.25%, Q4: 23.61%). After adjusting for all variables, METS-VF still showed positive relation to cataract prevalence (odds ratio (OR) = 3.14, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.67, 5.93). Subgroup analysis revealed a consistent relationship between METS-VF and cataracts across different groups. The RCS results showed that there was no significant nonlinear relationship between METS-VF and cataracts (P-non-linear = 0.209). ROC curve analysis showed that METS-VF outperformed BMI, WC, and WHtR in cataract prediction.
CONCLUSION: METS-VF is significantly positively related to a higher cataract prevalence, and this relationship remains robust across various subgroups. Additionally, METS-VF demonstrates a stronger predictive ability for cataract than BMI, WC, and WHtR.