Kristine A Madsen1, Jennifer Linchey. 1. Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Box 0503, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA. madsenk@peds.ucsf.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: School-based body mass index (BMI) or body composition screening is increasing, but little is known about the process of parent notification. Since 2001, California has required annual screening of body composition via the FITNESSGRAM, with optional notification. This study sought to identify the prevalence of parental notification when screening is required but notification is optional, and the methods and messages used. METHODS: Researchers conducted phone interviews with 851 school districts (89%) in California and reviewed notification materials from 54 districts. RESULTS: As of 2008, 53% of California districts notified parents of screening results. Many districts (24%) did not know the reason for their notification policy. Most districts notified parents via a letter mailed home (70%) or sent home with the child (18%). Whereas 79% of sample letters provided students' BMI, only 12% provided an explanation of BMI, and only half provided tips on what parents should do if concerned about their child's results. CONCLUSIONS: In California, where body composition screening is required but parent notification is not, approximately half of school districts elect to notify parents of results, most commonly via letter. Most letters do not explain BMI or percent body fat scores, nor do they suggest what parents should do for a child identified as at-risk. Further research to identify interpretable and actionable notification messages for parents will be critical if school-based BMI and body composition screening and notification is to reduce childhood obesity. Published 2012. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
BACKGROUND: School-based body mass index (BMI) or body composition screening is increasing, but little is known about the process of parent notification. Since 2001, California has required annual screening of body composition via the FITNESSGRAM, with optional notification. This study sought to identify the prevalence of parental notification when screening is required but notification is optional, and the methods and messages used. METHODS: Researchers conducted phone interviews with 851 school districts (89%) in California and reviewed notification materials from 54 districts. RESULTS: As of 2008, 53% of California districts notified parents of screening results. Many districts (24%) did not know the reason for their notification policy. Most districts notified parents via a letter mailed home (70%) or sent home with the child (18%). Whereas 79% of sample letters provided students' BMI, only 12% provided an explanation of BMI, and only half provided tips on what parents should do if concerned about their child's results. CONCLUSIONS: In California, where body composition screening is required but parent notification is not, approximately half of school districts elect to notify parents of results, most commonly via letter. Most letters do not explain BMI or percent body fat scores, nor do they suggest what parents should do for a child identified as at-risk. Further research to identify interpretable and actionable notification messages for parents will be critical if school-based BMI and body composition screening and notification is to reduce childhood obesity. Published 2012. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Authors: Jonathan A Mitchell; Daniel B Bornstein; Xuemei Sui; Steven P Hooker; Timothy S Church; Chong D Lee; Duck-Chul Lee; Steven N Blair Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Allison J Nihiser; Sarah M Lee; Howell Wechsler; Mary McKenna; Erica Odom; Chris Reinold; Diane Thompson; Larry Grummer-Strawn Journal: J Sch Health Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.118
Authors: Delia S West; James M Raczynski; Martha M Phillips; Zoran Bursac; C Heath Gauss; Brooke E E Montgomery Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2008-01-17 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Bonnie A Spear; Sarah E Barlow; Chris Ervin; David S Ludwig; Brian E Saelens; Karen E Schetzina; Elsie M Taveras Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Wenjun Li; James H Buszkiewicz; Robert B Leibowitz; Mary Ann Gapinski; Laura J Nasuti; Thomas G Land Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Megan Shepherd-Banigan; Janice F Bell; Anirban Basu; Cathryn Booth-LaForce; Jeffrey R Harris Journal: Med Care Res Rev Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Eun-Young Lee; Joel D Barnes; Justin J Lang; Diego A S Silva; Grant R Tomkinson; Mark S Tremblay Journal: J Exerc Sci Fit Date: 2020-05-10 Impact factor: 3.103