Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background/Objectives: Whole-diet patterns in geographically diverse university populations remain insufficiently characterised. We examined food-group consumption and dietary patterns according to sex and geographical background in a historical UK university cohort. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis included 111 students assessed at De Montfort University, Leicester, in early 2016. Habitual intake was assessed using an expanded, adapted EPIC-Norfolk food-frequency questionnaire. Fifteen food groups were evaluated using principal component analysis after log1p transformation and standardisation; between-group comparisons were adjusted for relevant covariates and subjected to Benjamini–Hochberg false-discovery-rate correction. Results: The participants had a mean age of 20.4 ± 1.2 years, and 70.3% were female. Three patterns—Plant-rich, Animal-source foods, and Energy-dense/discretionary—explained 46.25% of the variance, compared with 35.24% for the two-component alternative. Parallel analysis supported retention of three components; bootstrap results favoured their overall reproducibility but indicated substantial uncertainty in individual food-group loadings. Males had lower adjusted Plant-rich scores than females (−0.43 SD, 95% CI −0.76 to −0.10; q = 0.04). Plant-rich and Animal-source foods scores differed by geographical background (q = 0.006 for both global tests), whereas the Energy-dense/discretionary pattern did not. Conclusions: These exploratory patterns characterise dietary heterogeneity in this historical cohort but require replication in larger, contemporary samples.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peña‐Fernández et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: