| Literature DB >> 26132475 |
Shijun Lu1, Songming Du2, Zhoupeng Ren3, Jing Zhao4, Christina Chambers5, Jinfeng Wang3, Guansheng Ma6,7.
Abstract
This study assessed the association between accessibility of catering service venues and adolescents' alcohol use over the previous 30 days. The data were collected from cross-sectional surveys conducted in 2014, 2223 students at 27 high schools in Chaoyang and Xicheng districts, Beijing using self-administered questionnaires to collect the adolescents information on socio-demographic characteristics and recent alcohol experiences. The accessibility of, and proximity to, catering service venues were summarized by weights, which were calculated by multiplication of the type-weight and the distance-weight. All sampled schools were categorized into three subgroups (low, middle, and high geographic density) based on the tertile of nearby catering service venues, and a multi-level logistic regression analysis was performed to explore variance between the school levels. Considering the setting characteristics, the catering service venues weighted value was found to account for 8.6% of the school level variance of adolescent alcohol use. The odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of drinking over the past 30-days among adolescents with medium and high accessibility of catering service venues were 1.17 (0.86, 1.57) and 1.47 (1.06, 2.02), respectively (p < 0.001 for trend test). This study addressed a gap in the adolescent drinking influence by the catering service venues around schools in China. Results suggest that the greater accessibility of catering service venues around schools is associated with a growing risk of recent drinking.Entities:
Keywords: accessibility; adolescent drinking; alcoholic beverage; catering service venues; school environment
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26132475 PMCID: PMC4515651 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120707208
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The black points show the sampling schools located in Xicheng and Chaoyang Districts, Beijing.
Figure 2The distribution of catering service venues and different distance buffer for one school.
Univariate association of demographic characteristics with past 30 days alcohol use among 2223 adolescents in Beijing.
| Variable | Non-Use (n = 1690) n (%wt) | Past 30 Days Alcohol Use (n = 533) n (%wt) | OR (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male gender ( | 760 (44.6) | 288 (53.6) | 1.24 (0.96,1.60) |
| High/vocational school ( | 773 (39.6) | 346 (56.4) | 1.70 (1.26,2.28) * |
| School examination score | |||
| Medium ( | 837 (42.7) | 273 (43.6) | 1.32 (1.00,1.74) |
| High ( | 346 (18.1) | 165 (27.8) | 1.68 (1.32,2.14) * |
| Smoking | 288 (13.5) | 260 (38.3) | 3.69 (2.75,4.96) * |
| Living with | |||
| Single-parent ( | 246 (14.2) | 92 (15.9) | 1.04 (0.72,1.51) |
| Others ( | 115 (6.38) | 65 (11.0) | 1.54 (1.04,2.29) * |
| SES | |||
| Middle ( | 860 (50.2) | 266 (48.9) | 1.18 (0.84,1.65) |
| High ( | 537 (32.3) | 183 (36.2) | 1.46 (1.04,2.04) * |
* p < 0.05.
Predictors of past 30 days alcohol use among 2223 adolescents in Beijing.
| Variables | Null Model OR (95% CI) | Model with Individual Demographic Variables only aOR (95% CI) a | Model with Individual and School Setting Variables aOR (95% CI) a |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male gender ( | 1.27 (1.02,1.57) * | 1.29 (1.04,1.60) * | |
| High/vocational school ( | 1.79 (1.31,2.45) * | 1.56 (1.14,1.24) * | |
| School examination score | |||
| Medium ( | 1.18 (0.93,1.50) | 1.18 (0.93,1.50) | |
| High ( | 1.55 (1.17,2.06) * | 1.55 (1.17,2.06) * | |
| Smoking | 3.42 (2.71,4.32) * | 3.41 (2.70,4.30) * | |
| Living with | |||
| Single-parent ( | 1.08 (0.81,1.44) | 1.07 (0.81,1.43) | |
| Others ( | 1.53 (1.07,2.19) * | 1.52 (1.07,2.17) * | |
| SES | |||
| Medium ( | 1.15 (0.85,1.56) | 1.17 (0.86,1.57) | |
| High ( | 1.43 (1.04,1.97) * | 1.47 (1.06,2.02) * | |
| Accessibility of catering service venues | |||
| Medium ( | 1.00 (0.69,1.44) | ||
| High ( | 1.52 (1.03,2.22) * | ||
| Trend test | |||
| School level variance (SD) | 0.314 (0.103) | 0.097 (0.047) | 0.070 (0.040) |
| PCV | 69.1% | 77.7% | |
| MOR | 1.70 | 1.34 | 1.29 |
* p < 0.05; 95% CI for each of the covariates adjusted for all other variables.