Association Between Dietary Protein Intake and Abdominal Obesity in Rural Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study
- 1Department of Nutrition and Food Hygiene, School of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830011, China
Abstract
Objectives: Dietary protein intake has been suggested to be inversely associated with measures of adiposity, but evidence regarding its association with abdominal obesity remains limited. This study examined the association between different levels of dietary protein intake and prevalent abdominal obesity in a rural adult population, aiming to provide descriptive evidence for this specific rural population. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of data from a previous nutritional epidemiological survey conducted among 515 rural adults. Dietary intake was assessed with a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire combined with a 3-day 24-h dietary recall. Anthropometric measurements comprised body weight, height, waist circumference and hip circumference. Participants were divided into quartiles of protein intake: Q1 (<0.74 g/(kg·d)), Q2 (0.74–0.97 g/(kg·d)), Q3 (0.97–1.23 g/(kg·d)) and Q4 (≥1.23 g/(kg·d)). Abdominal obesity was defined as a waist circumference ≥ 90 cm in men and ≥85 cm in women. Continuous variables were summarized as medians (interquartile range) and compared using the Kruskal–Wallis H or Mann–Whitney U test; categorical variables were expressed as frequencies (percentages) and compared using the χ2 test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association, with adjustment for potential confounders. Results: With increasing protein intake (Q1 to Q4), body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, hip circumference and waist-to-hip ratio showed significant decreasing trends (p < 0.05), whereas total energy and macronutrient intake and the consumption of several food groups increased significantly (p < 0.05). Protein intake was lower in the abdominal obesity group (n = 374) than in the normal waist circumference group (0.88 vs. 1.19 g/(kg·d); p < 0.001). In the logistic regression models, higher protein intake was inversely associated with the odds of abdominal obesity, with a graded association across quartiles (trend p < 0.001). In the unadjusted model, Q4 had lower odds than Q1 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.128, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.065–0.250); after adjustment for energy intake the association was stronger (Q4: OR = 0.008, 95% CI: 0.003–0.023), and after further adjustment for age, sex, energy intake, lifestyle and dietary factors it remained (Q4: OR = 0.006, 95% CI: 0.002–0.018, p < 0.001). In sensitivity analyses using absolute protein intake (g/day), protein as a percentage of energy and a continuous per-SD model, these associations were markedly attenuated and none remained statistically significant (all p > 0.05). Conclusions: Although protein intake expressed as g/(kg·d) appeared to be inversely associated with prevalent abdominal obesity in this rural sample, with a graded pattern across quartiles, this association was largely explained by mathematical coupling arising from body-weight normalization. Using metrics independent of body weight, no significant association remained; these findings should therefore be interpreted as associations rather than causal effects, and prospective studies using alternative protein metrics are needed.
Related
- Dietary Fructose Intake, Metabolic Profile, and Liver Disease-Related Quality of Life in Adults with Obesity and MASLD: A Cross-Sectional Study
- Targeted Modulation of the Gut Microbiota in Obesity: From Dietary Interventions to Bacteriophage-Based Precision Therapies
- Fatty Acid-Binding Protein 3 (FABP3)-Mediated Abdominal Fat Deposition in Broilers via the PPAR Signaling Pathway
- Dietary protein source dictates the impact of obesogenic diets on hepatic steatosis and insulin resistance via carnitine-dependent regulation of acetyl-CoA carboxylase
- Microglial protein kinase CK2 prevents obesity in mice potentially through NLRP3 inflammasome activation.
BibTeX
@article{genjiafu2026association,
title = {{Association Between Dietary Protein Intake and Abdominal Obesity in Rural Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study}},
author = {Aerbusili Genjiafu and Wenzhuo Yu and Dina Muheyati and Meixia Lv and Muhairemu Jielili and Mengfan Liu and Jia Han},
journal = {Metabolites},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/metabo16110836},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/16/11/836},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Association Between Dietary Protein Intake and Abdominal Obesity in Rural Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study
AU - Aerbusili Genjiafu
AU - Wenzhuo Yu
AU - Dina Muheyati
AU - Meixia Lv
AU - Muhairemu Jielili
AU - Mengfan Liu
AU - Jia Han
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/30
JO - Metabolites
DO - 10.3390/metabo16110836
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1989/16/11/836
AB - Objectives: Dietary protein intake has been suggested to be inversely associated with measures of adiposity, but evidence regarding its association with abdominal obesity remains limited. This study examined the association between different levels of dietary protein intake and prevalent abdominal obesity in a rural adult population, aiming to provide descriptive evidence for this specific rural population. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of data from a previous nutritional epidemiological survey conducted among 515 rural adults. Dietary intake was assessed with a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire combined with a 3-day 24-h dietary recall. Anthropometric measurements comprised body weight, height, waist circumference and hip circumference. Participants were divided into quartiles of protein intake: Q1 (<0.74 g/(kg·d)), Q2 (0.74–0.97 g/(kg·d)), Q3 (0.97–1.23 g/(kg·d)) and Q4 (≥1.23 g/(kg·d)). Abdominal obesity was defined as a waist circumference ≥ 90 cm in men and ≥85 cm in women. Continuous variables were summarized as medians (interquartile range) and compared using the Kruskal–Wallis H or Mann–Whitney U test; categorical variables were expressed as frequencies (percentages) and compared using the χ2 test. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association, with adjustment for potential confounders. Results: With increasing protein intake (Q1 to Q4), body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, hip circumference and waist-to-hip ratio showed significant decreasing trends (p < 0.05), whereas total energy and macronutrient intake and the consumption of several food groups increased significantly (p < 0.05). Protein intake was lower in the abdominal obesity group (n = 374) than in the normal waist circumference group (0.88 vs. 1.19 g/(kg·d); p < 0.001). In the logistic regression models, higher protein intake was inversely associated with the odds of abdominal obesity, with a graded association across quartiles (trend p < 0.001). In the unadjusted model, Q4 had lower odds than Q1 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.128, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.065–0.250); after adjustment for energy intake the association was stronger (Q4: OR = 0.008, 95% CI: 0.003–0.023), and after further adjustment for age, sex, energy intake, lifestyle and dietary factors it remained (Q4: OR = 0.006, 95% CI: 0.002–0.018, p < 0.001). In sensitivity analyses using absolute protein intake (g/day), protein as a percentage of energy and a continuous per-SD model, these associations were markedly attenuated and none remained statistically significant (all p > 0.05). Conclusions: Although protein intake expressed as g/(kg·d) appeared to be inversely associated with prevalent abdominal obesity in this rural sample, with a graded pattern across quartiles, this association was largely explained by mathematical coupling arising from body-weight normalization. Using metrics independent of body weight, no significant association remained; these findings should therefore be interpreted as associations rather than causal effects, and prospective studies using alternative protein metrics are needed.
SN - 2218-1989
ER -