| Literature DB >> 27835960 |
Fei Dong1,2, Annie Green Howard3,2, Amy H Herring3,2, Amanda L Thompson2,4, Linda S Adair1,2, Barry M Popkin1,2, Allison E Aiello2,5, Bing Zhang6, Penny Gordon-Larsen7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While the household context is important for lifestyle behavior interventions, few studies have examined parent-child associations for diet and physical activity (PA) changes over time in a rapidly urbanizing country. We aimed to investigate changes in diet, screen time, and PA behaviors over time in children and their parents living in the same household, and examine the parent-child association for these behaviors.Entities:
Keywords: Animal-source food; Away-from-home eating; China; Household structure; Leisure-time sports; Screen time; Snacking; Urbanization
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27835960 PMCID: PMC5106797 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-016-0445-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Characteristics of analytic sample over time, China Health and Nutrition Survey 1991–2009
| 1991 | 2000 | 2009 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of parent–child pairs | 2257 | 2638 | 772 |
| Child’s age, y (mean ± SD)a | 12.6 ± 3.2 | 13.0 ± 2.9 | 14.2 ± 2.3 |
| Mother’s age, y (mean ± SD)a | 38.5 ± 5.4 | 39.1 ± 5.5 | 40.3 ± 4.4 |
| Father’s age, y (mean ± SD)a | 40.4 ± 6.0 | 40.5 ± 5.8 | 41.8 ± 5.0 |
| Child’s gender, % male | 51.4 | 52.7 | 53.2 |
| Highest parental education, %a | |||
| None/primary school | 18.8 | 8.2 | 9.2 |
| Middle school | 28.4 | 18.5 | 22.8 |
| High school | 49.1 | 67.0 | 58.9 |
| College, technical or higher | 3.8 | 5.8 | 9.1 |
| Number of generation, % three-generationa, b | 26.1 | 33.1 | 57.9 |
| Number of children, % one childa | 47.2 | 45.9 | 72.4 |
| Annual household income, 1000 yuan (mean ± SD)a, c | 11.4 ± 8.2 | 19.2 ± 19.8 | 40.0 ± 40.0 |
| Urbanicity (mean ± SD)a, d | 42.4 ± 15.2 | 54.2 ± 16.9 | 61.6 ± 18.4 |
aStatistically different across years at the p < 0.01 level using one-way ANOVA (continuous variables) or chi-squared test (categorical variables)
bThree-generation: children, parents and grandparents (versus two-generation: children and parents)
cTotal household income inflated to 2011
dUrbanicity defined by a multicomponent urbanicity scale ranging from 0–120 [31]
Fig. 1Predicted mean or probability of diet, screen time and PA among children, mothers, and fathersa. aSeparate random-effects negative binomial regression models for each behavior predicted adjusted mean values of animal-source foods, away-from-home eating, snacking, and screen time; random-effects logistic regression model predicted adjusted probability of leisure-time sports participation. All models controlled for baseline age (y), household income (tertiles), urbanicity (tertiles), geographic region (North/Central/South), and year of study entry. The rate of changes in away-from-home eating, snacking, and screen time was different across household members (p for interaction < 0.01). PA, physical activity. *p < 0.01 comparing the mean dietary, screen time, and PA measures (across all years) between the starred parent and the child (the reference)
Predicted parent-offspring associations for diet (% energy), screen time (hours/week), and leisure-time sports (any/none)a
| 1991 | 1993 | 1997 | 2000 | 2004 | 2006 | 2009 | P-interaction with year | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta | 99 % CI | Beta | 99 % CI | Beta | 99 % CI | Beta | 99 % CI | Beta | 99 % CI | Beta | 99 % CI | Beta | 99 % CI | ||
| Animal-source foods, % energyb | |||||||||||||||
| Mother ( | |||||||||||||||
| Low urbanicity | 1.59 | 1.50,1.67 | 1.51 | 1.43,1.58 | 1.43 | 1.36,1.51 | 1.27 | 1.19,1.34 | 1.28 | 1.20,1.36 | 1.19 | 1.10,1.28 | 1.14 | 1.03,1.25 | <0.001 |
| Medium urbanicity | 1.26 | 1.19,1.34 | 1.18 | 1.11,1.25 | 1.11 | 1.04,1.18 | 0.94 | 0.88,1.01 | 0.96 | 0.88,1.03 | 0.87 | 0.79,0.95 | 0.82 | 0.71,0.92 | |
| High urbanicity | 0.89 | 0.81,0.97 | 0.81 | 0.74,0.88 | 0.74 | 0.67,0.81 | 0.57 | 0.51,0.64 | 0.58 | 0.51,0.66 | 0.49 | 0.41,0.57 | 0.44 | 0.34,0.55 | |
| Father ( | |||||||||||||||
| Low urbanicity | 1.44 | 1.35,1.53 | 1.37 | 1.28,1.45 | 1.30 | 1.22,1.38 | 1.20 | 1.11,1.28 | 1.17 | 1.08,1.27 | 1.12 | 1.02,1.22 | 1.07 | 0.95,1.19 | <0.001 |
| Medium urbanicity | 1.20 | 1.11,1.29 | 1.13 | 1.05,1.21 | 1.06 | 0.98,1.14 | 0.96 | 0.88,1.04 | 0.93 | 0.85,1.02 | 0.88 | 0.79,0.98 | 0.83 | 0.71,0.94 | |
| High urbanicity | 0.87 | 0.78,0.96 | 0.80 | 0.72,0.87 | 0.73 | 0.65,0.81 | 0.63 | 0.55,0.71 | 0.60 | 0.51,0.69 | 0.55 | 0.46,0.64 | 0.49 | 0.38,0.61 | |
| Away-from-home eating, % energyb | |||||||||||||||
| Mother ( | |||||||||||||||
| Low urbanicity | 0.45 | 0.41,0.49 | 0.43 | 0.40,0.47 | 0.41 | 0.37,0.44 | 0.35 | 0.31,0.38 | 0.33 | 0.30,0.37 | 0.35 | 0.31,0.39 | 0.29 | 0.25,0.33 | <0.001 |
| Medium urbanicity | 0.41 | 0.37,0.44 | 0.39 | 0.36,0.42 | 0.37 | 0.33,0.40 | 0.31 | 0.28,0.34 | 0.29 | 0.26,0.32 | 0.31 | 0.27,0.34 | 0.25 | 0.21,0.28 | |
| High urbanicity | 0.33 | 0.29,0.36 | 0.31 | 0.28,0.35 | 0.29 | 0.26,0.32 | 0.23 | 0.20,0.26 | 0.21 | 0.18,0.24 | 0.23 | 0.20,0.26 | 0.17 | 0.13,0.20 | |
| Father ( | 0.28 | 0.25,0.31 | 0.28 | 0.25,0.31 | 0.27 | 0.24,0.29 | 0.25 | 0.22,0.28 | 0.24 | 0.21,0.27 | 0.26 | 0.23,0.29 | 0.23 | 0.19,0.27 | 0.002 |
| Snacking, % energyb | |||||||||||||||
| Mother ( | 4.55 | 2.87,6.22 | 6.62 | 4.75,8.49 | 7.00 | 5.07,8.93 | 5.51 | 3.45,7.56 | 7.21 | 4.84,9.57 | 5.24 | 3.47,7.01 | 2.39 | 0.91,3.86 | <0.001 |
| Father ( | 4.49 | 2.59,6.39 | 7.17 | 4.66,9.67 | 4.88 | 2.90,6.86 | 3.44 | 1.49,5.39 | 6.59 | 3.41,9.77 | 4.15 | 1.81,6.49 | 2.13 | 0.17,4.08 | <0.001 |
| Screen time, hrs/weekc | |||||||||||||||
| Mother ( | 0.02 | 0.01,0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00,0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00,0.02 | 0.002 | ||||||||
| Father ( | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.02 | 0.01,0.03 | 0.01 | 0.00,0.02 | 0.01 | −0.00,0.01 | 0.009 |
| Any leisure-time sports participation, %d | |||||||||||||||
| OR | 99 % CI | OR | 99 % CI | OR | 99 % CI | ||||||||||
| Mother ( | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1.98 | 1.05,3.71 | 1.98 | 1.05,3.71 | 1.98 | 1.05,3.71 | 0.36 |
| Father ( | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 2.83 | 1.52,5.28 | 2.83 | 1.52,5.28 | 2.83 | 1.52,5.28 | 0.99 |
Due to our large sample size, 99 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated instead of 95 % CIs to correspond to the p-values of 0.01
aTable shows coefficients at medium income in the Central region, and by urbanicity where there was statistically significant interaction by urbanicity. Separate random-effects negative binomial regression models for each behavior predicted beta coefficients for animal-source foods, away-from-home eating, snacking, and screen time; random-effects logistic regression model predicted odds ratios (OR) for leisure-time sports participation. All models controlled for child’s baseline age (y) and sex, household income (tertiles), urbanicity (tertiles), geographic region (North/Central/South), year of study entry, and highest parental education (none or primary/middle school/high school/technical, college or higher)
bBeta coefficients for animal-source foods, away-from-home eating, and snacking indicate the change of child’s daily intake in percentage of total energy with mother’s or father’s intake increased by 10 % total energy
cBeta coefficients for screen time indicate the change of child’s screen time in hours/week with mother’s or father’s screen time increased by one hour per week
dParent-child association presented as ORs of participation in children based on parental participation status
Predicted mean/probability (standard error) of diet, screen time, and PA in children by household structurea
| Has siblings | Only child |
| No grandparents | Has grandparents |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Animal-source foods, % energy | 12.0 (0.3) | 13.4 (0.3) | <0.001 | 12.8 (0.3) | 12.7 (0.3) | 0.82 |
| Away-from-home eating, % energy | 21.1 (0.3) | 25.0 (0.3) | <0.001 | 23.8 (0.3) | 22.1 (0.3) | <0.001 |
| Snacking, % energy | 3.2 (0.7) | 6.0 (1.2) | <0.001 | 5.1 (1.1) | 6.0 (1.3) | 0.21 |
| Screen time, hrs/wk | 13.3 (0.4) | 14.1 (0.3) | 0.11 | 14.2 (0.4) | 13.5 (0.3) | 0.12 |
| Any leisure-time sports participation, % | 26.4 (1.8) | 32.9 (1.3) | 0.005 | 32.5 (1.6) | 29.1 (1.4) | 0.13 |
aSeparate random-effects negative binomial regression models for each behavior predicted adjusted mean values of animal-source foods, away-from-home eating, snacking, and screen time; random-effects logistic regression model predicted adjusted probability of leisure-time sports participation. All models controlled for child’s age (y) and sex, household income (tertiles), urbanicity (tertiles), geographic region (North/Central/South), year of study entry, and highest parental education (none or primary/middle school/high school/technical, college or higher). PA, physical activity