| Literature DB >> 26043034 |
Sara Pereira1, Peter T Katzmarzyk2, Thayse Natacha Gomes3, Alessandra Borges4, Daniel Santos5, Michele Souza6, Fernanda K dos Santos7, Raquel N Chaves8, Catherine M Champagne9, Tiago V Barreira10,11, José A R Maia12.
Abstract
Obesity in children is partly due to unhealthy lifestyle behaviours, e.g., sedentary activity and poor dietary choices. This trend has been seen globally. To determine the extent of these behaviours in a Portuguese population of children, 686 children 9.5 to 10.5 years of age were studied. Our aims were to: (1) describe profiles of children's lifestyle behaviours; (2) identify behaviour pattern classes; and (3) estimate combined effects of individual/ socio-demographic characteristics in predicting class membership. Physical activity and sleep time were estimated by 24-h accelerometry. Nutritional habits, screen time and socio-demographics were obtained. Latent Class Analysis was used to determine unhealthy lifestyle behaviours. Logistic regression analysis predicted class membership. About 78% of children had three or more unhealthy lifestyle behaviours, while 0.2% presented no risk. Two classes were identified: Class 1-Sedentary, poorer diet quality; and Class 2-Insufficiently active, better diet quality, 35% and 65% of the population, respectively. More mature children (Odds Ratio (OR) = 6.75; 95%CI = 4.74-10.41), and boys (OR = 3.06; 95% CI = 1.98-4.72) were more likely to be overweight/obese. However, those belonging to Class 2 were less likely to be overweight/obese (OR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.43-0.84). Maternal education level and household income did not significantly predict weight status (p ≥ 0.05).Entities:
Keywords: ISCOLE; latent classes; unhealthy lifestyle behaviours; youth
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26043034 PMCID: PMC4488788 DOI: 10.3390/nu7064345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Sample descriptive characteristics.
| Variables | Total |
|---|---|
| Anthropometric sample characteristics | |
| Height (cm) | 143.5 ± 6.8 |
| Weight (kg) | 40.4 ± 9.2 |
| Percent body fat (%) | 22.9 ± 7.5 |
| BMI (Kg/m−2) need to footnote this | 19.5 ± 3.4 |
| Maturity offset | −1.90 ± 0.9 |
| Gender | |
| Boys | 305 (44.5%) |
| Girls | 381 (55.5%) |
| Weight Status | |
| Normal weight | 372 (54.2%) |
| Overweight/obese | 314 (45.8%) |
| Maternal education | |
| <Grade 12 | 317 (46.2%) |
| Grade 12/diploma/technical qualification | 191 (27.8%) |
| University | 108 (15.7%) |
| Did not report | 70 (10.2%) |
| Household income | |
| <12.000 € | 270 (39.4%) |
| 12.000 €–29.999 € | 195 (28.4%) |
| ≥30.000 € | 76 (11.1%) |
| Did not report | 145 (21.1%) |
Configurations of behavioural risks, their observed (fo) and expected frequencies (fe), χ2 statistic and p-values.
| No. of Risks | MVPA < 60 min | Fruits/Vegs All Days | Sleep < 10 h | Screen ≥ 120 min | Sugar Drinks ≥ 2 days/week | fo | fe | χ2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 21.44 | 19.48 | <0.001 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 21.44 | 17.62 | <0.001 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 21.44 | 17.62 | <0.001 |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 21.44 | 0.28 | 0.598 |
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 21.44 | 19.48 | <0.001 |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 21.44 | 17.62 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 21.44 | 17.62 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 11 | 21.44 | 5.08 | 0.024 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 18 | 21.44 | 0.55 | 0.457 |
| 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 21.44 | 15.86 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 21.44 | 15.86 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 38 | 21.44 | 12.80 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 21.44 | 21.48 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 21.44 | 15.86 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 43 | 21.44 | 21.69 | <0.001 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 21.44 | 12.60 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 21.44 | 2.58 | 0.108 |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 21.44 | 15.86 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 21.44 | 0.59 | 0.442 |
| 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 52 | 21.44 | 43.57 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 21.44 | 15.86 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 21.44 | 14.18 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 56 | 21.44 | 55.72 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 21.44 | 19.49 | <0.001 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 21.44 | 7.22 | 0.007 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 72 | 21.44 | 119.26 | <0.001 |
| 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 56 | 21.44 | 55.72 | <0.001 |
| 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 21.44 | 0.92 | 0.338 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 21.44 | 6.10 | 0.014 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 24 | 21.44 | 0.31 | 0.580 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 120 | 21.44 | 453.16 | <0.001 |
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 67 | 21.44 | 96.84 | <0.001 |
0 = no; 1 = yes; Example: 00000 = 0 risk behaviour; 11111 = 5 risk behaviours.
Criteria used to identify the best number of latent classes.
| Fit measures | Number of Classes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| Pearson χ2 | 18.208 | 8.997 | 4.064 |
| LR χ2 | 18.839 | 9.740 | 4.270 |
| # of parameters | 11 | 17 | 23 |
| AIC | 3851.165 | 3854.065 | 3860.596 |
| BIC | 3901.004 | 3931.090 | 3964.806 |
| LMR LRT | 42.152 | 8.873 | 5.333 |
| 1 class
| 2 classes
| 3 classes
| |
| BLRT probability | <0.001 | 0.280 | 0.614 |
LR, Likelihood ratio test; AIC, Akaike information criteria; BIC, Bayesian AIC; LMR LRT, Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood ratio test; BLRT, Bootstrap LRT p-value.
Figure 1Profiles for the 2-class Latent class analysis (LCA) model of risk behaviours.
Behavioural, biological and demographic characteristics of the Portuguese 2-latent classes.
| Class 1 (
| Class 2 (
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MVPA |
|
| <0.001 | |
| ≥60 min·day−1 | 116 (47.9%) | 134 (30.2%) | ||
| <60 min·day−1 | 126 (52.1%) | 310 (69.8%) | ||
| Fruits/Vegetables | 0.004 | |||
| All days | 53 (21.9%) | 144 (32.4%) | ||
| <7 days | 189 (78.1%) | 300 (67.6%) | ||
| Sleep time | 0.051 | |||
| ≥10 h·day−1 | 24 (9.9%) | 26 (5.9%) | ||
| <10 h·day−1 | 218 (90.1%) | 418 (94.1%) | ||
| Screen time | 0.002 | |||
| <120 min·day−1 | 70 (28.9%) | 181 (40.8%) | ||
| ≥120 min·day−1 | 172 (71.1%) | 263 (59.2%) | ||
| Sugary drinks | <0.001 | |||
| <2 days/week | 0 (0.0%) | 444 (100.0%) | ||
| ≥2 days/week | 242 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | ||
| Gender | 0.005 | |||
| Girls | 117 (48.4%) | 264 (59.5%) | ||
| Boys | 125 (51.7%) | 180 (40.5%) | ||
| Weight status | 0.059 | |||
| Normal Weight | 143 (59.1%) | 229 (51.6%) | ||
| Overweight/obese | 99 (40.91%) | 215 (48.4%) | ||
| Maternal education | <0.001 | |||
| <Grade 12 | 120 (49.6%) | 197 (44.4%) | ||
| Grade 12/diploma/technical qualification | 79 (32.6%) | 112 (25.2%) | ||
| University | 20 (8.7%) | 88 (19.8%) | ||
| Did not report | 23 (9.5%) | 47 (10.6%) | ||
| Household income | 0.106 | |||
| <12.000 € | 94 (38.8%) | 176 (39.6%) | ||
| 12.000 €–29.999 € | 77 (31.8%) | 118 (26.6%) | ||
| ≥30.000 € | 18 (7.4%) | 58 (13.1%) | ||
| Did not report | 53 (21.9%) | 92 (20.7%) | ||
| Maturity offset | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | 0.292 | |
| −2.02 ± 0.95 | −1.83 ± 0.85 | |||
Associations (coefficients, standard errors ‡, OR and 95%CI) between biological, socio-demographic characteristics, latent classes and BMI classes.
| Variables | Coefficients(SE) | Odds Ratio | 95%CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (Male) | 1.12(0.22) | 3.06 | 1.98–4.72 | <0.001 |
| Maternal Education | ||||
| <12 Grade | Reference | |||
| Grade12/diploma/technical | 0.14(0.26) | 1.15 | 0.70–1.90 | 0.550 |
| University | 0.49(0.35) | 1.632 | 0.83–3.21 | 0.156 |
| Household income | ||||
| <12.000€ | Reference | |||
| 12.000 €–29.999 € | −0.25(0.26) | 0.78 | 0.47–1.30 | 0.339 |
| ≥30.000 € | −0.50(0.32) | 0.61 | 0.32–1.14 | 0.123 |
| Maturity offset | 1.91(0.22) | 6.75 | 4.38–10.41 | <0.001 |
| Latent Classes (iahdq) | −0.51(0.170) | 0.60 | 0.43–0.84 | <0.001 |
‡, standard-errors adjusted for school clustering; iabdq, insufficiently active, better diet quality.