| Literature DB >> 16995936 |
Saskia J te Velde1, Marianne Wind, Frank J van Lenthe, Knut-Inge Klepp, Johannes Brug.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fruit and vegetable consumption is low in the Netherlands and a key target in healthy diet promotion. However, hardly any information is available on differences in fruit and vegetable consumption between Dutch children and ethnic minority children. Therefore, the aim of present study was to determine differences in usual fruit and vegetable intake between native Dutch and non-Western ethnic minority children and to study differences in and mediating effects of potential psychosocial and environmental determinants.Entities:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16995936 PMCID: PMC1599740 DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-3-31
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Figure 1Conceptual model of the relationship between ethnicity and fruit and vegetable consumption and the potential mediators in this relationship.
Characteristics of the study population by ethnicity
| N = 531 | N = 258 | 48.6% | N = 273 | 51.4% | ||
| mean | mean | mean | SD | |||
| age (years) | 10.7 | 0.5 | 10.7 | 0.5 | 10.8 | 0.5 |
| gender (# girls) | 280 | 52.7% | 133 | 51.6 | 144 | 54.8 |
| Mother's educational level | N = 424 | % | N = 232 | % | N = 192 | |
| less than 7 years | 52 | 12.3 | 5 | 2.2 | 47 | 24.5 |
| 7–9 years | 45 | 10.6 | 14 | 6.0 | 31 | 16.1 |
| 10–12 years | 98 | 23.1 | 64 | 27.6 | 34 | 17.7 |
| more than 12 years | 229 | 54.0 | 149 | 64.2 | 80 | 41.7 |
Results of multiple linear regression analyses for differences in fruit and vegetable intake between Dutch children and non-Western immigrant children
| Fruit intake | Vegetable intake | ||||||
| N | βa | 95% CI | N | βb | 95% CI | ||
| Model 1 | boys | 249 | 0.02 | -0.21; 0.25 | |||
| girls | 280 | 0.15; 0.59 | 529 | 0.97 | 0.89; 1.04 | ||
| Model 2 | boys | 196 | -0.05 | -0.34; 0.25 | |||
| girls | 227 | 423 | 1.01 | 0.92; 1.11 | |||
Model 1 – adjusted for sex; Model 2 – Model1 + adjusted for mother's educational level (dichotomous)
aβ reflects difference non-Western immigrants (1) versus Dutch (0)
bβ reflects ratio Dutch: non-Western immigrants
Mean scores on determinants for fruit intake
| Total | Dutch | non-Western | ||||||
| N | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | pa | |
| Attitude | 528 | 1.36 | 0.77 | 1.26 | 0.81 | 1.46 | 0.73 | |
| Self efficacy | ||||||||
| Difficulty item 1 | 525 | 0.45 | 1.52 | 0.74 | 1.47 | 0.18 | 1.53 | |
| Ability item 1 | 526 | 1.48 | 0.88 | 1.42 | 0.94 | 1.55 | 0.81 | 0.164 |
| Liking | 528 | 1.5 | 0.67 | 1.43 | 0.75 | 1.57 | 0.58 | |
| Preferences | 527 | 1.24 | 0.65 | 1.16 | 0.71 | 1.32 | 0.58 | |
| Perceived barriers | 526 | -1.3 | 0.84 | -1.41 | 0.77 | -1.20 | 0.89 | |
| Correct Knowledge (%) | 524 | 61 | 58 | 64 | ||||
| Modeling | 528 | 0.96 | 0.82 | 0.91 | 0.83 | 1.01 | 0.81 | |
| Active encouragement | 527 | 0.62 | 1.31 | 0.38 | 1.36 | 0.84 | 1.23 | |
| Demanding | 516 | 0.56 | 1.18 | 0.54 | 1.2 | 0.59 | 1.16 | |
| Allowing | 515 | 1.51 | 0.89 | 1.52 | 0.83 | 1.51 | 0.94 | |
| Facilitating | 522 | 0.55 | 1.15 | 0.34 | 1.17 | 0.75 | 1.09 | |
| Home availability | 527 | 1.2 | 0.65 | 1.24 | 0.6 | 1.15 | 0.69 | |
| School availability | 518 | -1.69 | 0.81 | -1.77 | 0.69 | -1.61 | 0.9 | |
| Availability at friends | 503 | 0.51 | 1.28 | 0.61 | 1.22 | 0.42 | 1.33 | |
| Availability at club | 406 | -0.43 | 1.51 | -0.59 | 1.46 | -0.24 | 1.54 | |
1 answers were recoded in a way that higher scores reflect higher self-efficacy
a p-value based on Mann-Whitney test between Dutch and non-Western immigrants
Mean scores for determinants for vegetable intake
| Total | Dutch | non-Western | ||||||
| N | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | pa | |
| Attitude | 529 | 1.16 | 0.87 | 1.03 | 0.89 | 1.27 | 0.83 | |
| Self efficacy | ||||||||
| Difficulty item 1 | 527 | 0.25 | 1.55 | 0.51 | 1.48 | 0.00 | 1.57 | |
| Ability item 1 | 526 | 1.08 | 1.18 | 1.04 | 1.19 | 1.13 | 1.16 | 0.328 |
| Liking | 528 | 0.87 | 1.03 | 0.76 | 1.07 | 0.99 | 0.98 | |
| Preferences | 529 | 0.69 | 0.84 | 0.57 | 0.83 | 0.81 | 0.83 | |
| Perceived barriers | 528 | -1.15 | 0.96 | -1.33 | 0.85 | -0.97 | 1.02 | |
| Correct Knowledge (%) | 524 | 37 | 0.35 | 0.48 | 0.38 | 0.49 | 0.384 | |
| Modeling | 529 | 0.97 | 0.84 | 0.87 | 0.90 | 1.06 | 0.77 | |
| Active encouragement | 525 | 0.58 | 1.34 | 0.41 | 1.34 | 0.74 | 1.33 | |
| Demanding | 530 | 0.59 | 1.16 | 0.57 | 1.14 | 0.62 | 1.19 | 0.607 |
| Allowing | 529 | 1.24 | 1.04 | 1.23 | 1.00 | 1.25 | 1.09 | 0.393 |
| Facilitating | 514 | -0.08 | 1.34 | -0.49 | 1.25 | 0.32 | 1.29 | |
| Home availability | 527 | 0.96 | 0.78 | 0.95 | 0.70 | 0.96 | 0.85 | 0.427 |
| School availability | 519 | -1.65 | 0.87 | -1.75 | 0.78 | -1.56 | 0.95 | |
| Availability at friends | 518 | -0.09 | 1.45 | -0.12 | 1.39 | -0.06 | 1.52 | 0.626 |
| Availability at club | 413 | -0.82 | 1.42 | -1.00 | 1.33 | -0.61 | 1.49 | |
1 answers were recoded in a way that higher scores reflect higher self-efficacy
a p-value based on Mann-Whitney test between Dutch and non-Western immigrants
Effect of adjustment for potential mediators in the association between ethnicity and fruit intake in girls.
| Potential mediator | Original 1 | After adjustment | % |
| 'Difficulty' item of self-efficacy construct (n = 278) | 0.381*** | 0.511*** | 34.1 |
| Knowledge (n = 277) | 0.398*** | 0.327** | -17.8 |
| Facilitation (n = 275) | 0.360** | 0.281* | 21.9 |
| Knowledge & facilitation (n = 271) | 0.381*** | 0.243* | 36.2 |
1 original regression coefficients differ because of different numbers in the analyses due to missing values on the potential mediators
*** p < 0.001 ** p = 0.01 * p = 0.05
Constructs and items of the determinant questionnaire
| Constructs with items | Response categories |
| Attitude | 5 point scale from 2 = I fully agree to -2 = I fully disagree |
| Self efficacy | 5 point scale from -2 = I fully agree to +2 = I fully disagree |
| Liking | 5 point scale from 2 = I fully agree to -2 = I fully disagree |
| Preferences fruit | 5 point scale from 2 = like very much to -2 = dislike very much and 0 = have not tried |
| Preferences vegetables | 5 point scale from 2 = like very much to -2 = dislike very much and 0 = have not tried |
| Perceived barriers fruit | 5 point scale from 2 = I fully agree to -2 = I fully disagree |
| Perceived barriers vegetables | 5 point scale from 2 = I fully agree to -2 = I fully disagree |
| Knowledge fruit | 1 = no fruit, 2 = 1–3 pieces per week, 3 = 4–6 pieces per week, 4 = 1 piece per day, 5 = 2 pieces per day, 6 = 3 pieces per day,7 = 4 pieces per day, 8 = 5 pieces per day or more recoded: correct knowledge = 5–8 |
| Knowledge vegetables | 1 = no vegetables, 2 = 1–3 portions (serving spoons) per week, 3 = 4–6 portions per week, 4 = 1 portion every day,5 = 2 portions every day, 6 = 3 portions every day, 7 = 4 portions every day, 8 = 5 or more portions every day recoded: correct knowledge = 6–8 |
| Perceived social environmental | |
| 5 point scale from 2 = I fully agree to -2 = I fully disagree | |
| Active encouragement | 5 point scale from 2 = I fully agree to -2 = I fully disagree |
| 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never | |
| Allowing | 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never |
| Facilitating | 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never |
| Perceived physical environment | |
| Home availability | 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never |
| School availability | 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never |
| Availability at friends | 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never |
| Availability at the club | 5 point scale from 2 = yes, always to -2 = never |