Literature DB >> 22036837

Does a population-based multi-factorial lifestyle intervention increase social inequality in dietary habits? The Inter99 study.

Ulla Toft1, Marie Jakobsen, Mette Aadahl, Charlotta Pisinger, Torben Jørgensen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the effect of an individualised multi-factorial lifestyle intervention on dietary habits differs across socioeconomic groups.
METHODS: The study was an individualised multi-factorial lifestyle intervention study with a control group, Inter99 (1999-2006), Copenhagen, Denmark. Participants in the intervention group (n=6 091) received lifestyle intervention during a five-year period. The control group (n=3 324) was followed by questionnaires. Multilevel regression analyses were used, including interaction term between intervention effect and socioeconomic position (SEP) and analysed separately for men and women. SEP was measured as length of education and employment status and dietary habits were measured by a validated food frequency questionnaire.
RESULTS: Men with a short education improved their dietary habits more (net-change [95% confidence interval]) (0.25 points [-0.01;0.52]) than men with longer education (0.02 points [-0.09;0.14]), (interaction: p=0.02). Furthermore, unemployed women improved their dietary intake more (0.33 points [0.05;0.61]) than employed women (0.01 points [-0.10;0.11]), (interaction: p=0.03). Similar results were found for fruit intake, whereas no significant interactions were found for fish, fat and vegetable intake.
CONCLUSIONS: Individualised dietary interventions do not increase and may even decrease or hinder further widening of the social inequalities in health due to unhealthy dietary habits among socially disadvantaged individuals.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22036837     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.10.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  6 in total

1.  Investigating the predictive power of constructs of extended Pender's health promotion model and some background factors in fruit and vegetable consumption behavior among government employees.

Authors:  Freshteh Khatti-Dizabadi; Jamshid Yazdani-Charati; Reza Amani; Firoozeh Mostafavi
Journal:  J Educ Health Promot       Date:  2022-03-23

Review 2.  Are interventions to promote healthy eating equally effective for all? Systematic review of socioeconomic inequalities in impact.

Authors:  Rory McGill; Elspeth Anwar; Lois Orton; Helen Bromley; Ffion Lloyd-Williams; Martin O'Flaherty; David Taylor-Robinson; Maria Guzman-Castillo; Duncan Gillespie; Patricia Moreira; Kirk Allen; Lirije Hyseni; Nicola Calder; Mark Petticrew; Martin White; Margaret Whitehead; Simon Capewell
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-05-02       Impact factor: 3.295

3.  Credibility of subgroup analyses by socioeconomic status in public health intervention evaluations: An underappreciated problem?

Authors:  Greig Inglis; Daryll Archibald; Lawrence Doi; Yvonne Laird; Stephen Malden; Louise Marryat; John McAteer; Jan Pringle; John Frank
Journal:  SSM Popul Health       Date:  2018-10-19

4.  Habit strength and between-meal snacking in daily life: the moderating role of level of education.

Authors:  Saskia Wouters; Viviane Thewissen; Mira Duif; Rob Jh van Bree; Lilian Lechner; Nele Jacobs
Journal:  Public Health Nutr       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 4.022

5.  Socioeconomic inequalities in childhood-to-adulthood BMI tracking in three British birth cohorts.

Authors:  Tom Norris; David Bann; Rebecca Hardy; William Johnson
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2019-06-05       Impact factor: 5.095

6.  Validation of an instrument for perceived factors affecting fruit and vegetable intake based on Pender's health promotion model.

Authors:  Freshteh Khatti-Dizabadi; Jamshid Yazdani-Charati; Reza Amani; Firoozeh Mostafavi
Journal:  J Nutr Sci       Date:  2022-02-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.