| Literature DB >> 27598179 |
Stephanie E Clark-Reyna1, Sara E Grineski2, Timothy W Collins3.
Abstract
Concerns about children's weight have steadily risen alongside the manufacture and use of myriad chemicals in the US. One class of chemicals, known as metabolic disruptors, interfere with human endocrine and metabolic functioning and are of specific concern to children's health and development. This article examines the effect of residential concentrations of metabolic disrupting chemicals on children's school performance for the first time. Census tract-level ambient concentrations for known metabolic disruptors come from the US Environmental Protection Agency's National Air Toxics Assessment. Other measures were drawn from a survey of primary caretakers of 4th and 5th grade children in El Paso Independent School District (El Paso, TX, USA). A mediation model is employed to examine two hypothetical pathways through which the ambient level of metabolic disruptors at a child's home might affect grade point average. Results indicate that concentrations of metabolic disruptors are statistically significantly associated with lower grade point averages directly and indirectly through body mass index. Findings from this study have practical implications for environmental justice research and chemical policy reform in the US.Entities:
Keywords: NATA; academic achievement; body mass index; children; endocrine disrupting chemicals; environmental justice; metabolic disruptors; obesity; obesogen
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27598179 PMCID: PMC5036707 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13090874
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Descriptive statistics for all analysis variables.
| Grade Point Average (GPA) | 1240 | 6 | 0.20 | 4 | 3.40 | 0.70 |
| Ambient concentration of known metabolic disrupters (MDs) (ln) | 1319 | 0 | −0.07 | 2.48 | 0.84 | 0.43 |
| Known and suspected (ln) ambient concentration of MDs 1 | 1319 | 0 | −0.02 | 2.61 | 0.94 | 0.44 |
| Body Mass Index (BMI) | 1273 | 3.50 | 6.67 | 46.48 | 19.59 | 5.16 |
| Child’s age (years) | 1312 | 0.50 | 9 | 13 | 10.40 | 0.80 |
| Mother’s education (years) | 1208 | 8.40 | 1 | 21 | 13.70 | 3.60 |
| Mother speaks English | 1180 | 12.70 | 0 | 3 | 2.20 | 1 |
| Child is male | 1299 | 1.50 | 49.60 | 644 | 655 | |
| Free/reduced priced meals | 1209 | 8.30 | 40.90 | 494 | 715 | |
| Teenage motherhood | 1178 | 8.40 | 8.10 | 95 | 1083 | |
| Mother is Hispanic | 1185 | 10.20 | 76.70 | 909 | 276 | |
| Mother is non-Hispanic black | 1198 | 9.20 | 3.00 | 36 | 1162 |
1 Used only in the sensitivity analysis.
Figure 1Levels of metabolic descriptor (MD) concentrations and approximate locations of participating children’s homes in the El Paso, TX Study Area.
Correlation Matrix.
| Variables | GPA | Known MDs | Suspected/Known MD | Child’s BMI | Child Is Male | Age of the Child | Free Meals | Teenage Motherhood | Mother’s Education | Mother Is Hispanic | Mother Is Non-Hispanic Black |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPA | |||||||||||
| Known MDs (ln) | −0.226 ** | ||||||||||
| Suspected/known MDs (ln) | −0.228 ** | 0.999 ** | |||||||||
| Child’s BMI | −0.141 ** | 0.104 ** | 0.103 ** | ||||||||
| Child is male | −0.096 ** | 0.030 | 0.031 | 0.077 ** | |||||||
| Age of the child | −0.074 ** | 0.054 * | 0.054 * | 0.099 ** | 0.033 | ||||||
| Free meals | −0.316 ** | 0.329 ** | 0.328 ** | 0.149 ** | −0.008 | 0.089 ** | |||||
| Teenage motherhood | −0.100 ** | 0.083 ** | 0.088 ** | −0.008 | 0.015 | 0.049 | 0.116 ** | ||||
| Mother‘s education | 0.298 ** | −0.298 ** | −0.299 ** | −0.106 ** | 0.009 | −0.075 ** | −0.487 ** | −0.079 ** | |||
| Mother is Hispanic | −0.201 ** | 0.256 ** | 0.257 ** | 0.123 ** | −0.005 | 0.010 | 0.256 ** | 0.074 * | −0.238 ** | ||
| Mother is non-Hispanic black | 0.016 | −0.068 * | −0.067 * | −0.026 | 0.040 | 0.025 | −0.067 * | 0.020 | 0.060 * | −0.321 ** | |
| Mother’s English proficiency | −0.066 * | 0.136 ** | 0.137 ** | 0.042 | 0 | 0.048 | 0.112 ** | 0.012 | −0.030 | 0.327 ** | −0.078 ** |
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Figure 2Pooled Results for PROCESS Model Predicting Children’s Grade Point Average (GPA) (n = 1319).