{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.045662100456621, 'fraction_numerical': 0.033268101761252444, 'mean_word_length': 4.420494699646643, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 2, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Differences in diet quality between weekdays and weekends: utility of a random effects model

We examined differences in dietary intake on weekdays (WD) and weekends (WE) and the utility of modeling WD and WE in examining associations with salient variables. 3‐day diet records (2 WD/1 WE) were obtained from 252 children age 8–18 years with type 1 diabetes. Random effects models were used to examine differences between WD and WE in caloric intake and diet quality assessed with Healthy Eating Index 2005 (HEI) total and subscales. Random effects models were also used to examine associations of sex and age with HEI on WD and WE; findings were compared to those using the 3‐day mean HEI. Caloric intake was not significantly different between WE and WD. Total HEI on WE was poorer than on WD (49.4 vs. 53.0, p=.0001); with differences greatest for the saturated fat subscale (p=.001), and the solid fat/alcohol/added sugar subscale (p=.007). Neither sex nor age was associated with the 3‐day mean HEI. However, in the random effects model, males had a poorer HEI than females on WE (45.0 vs. 49.5, p=.005) with no gender differences on WD. Adolescents (age >12) had a poorer HEI than children on WD (50.2 vs. 52.6, p=.03), with no age differences on WE. A random effects model including each WD and WE day of intake would facilitate analysis when there are disparate numbers of WD and WE across subjects, and provides an understanding of differential associations by WD and WE. Research support: NICHD Intramural Research Program.