| Literature DB >> 28182671 |
Mekdes K Gebremariam1, Mai J Chinapaw2, Bettina Bringolf-Isler3,4, Elling Bere5, Eva Kovacs6,7, Maïté Verloigne8, F Marijn Stok9, Yannis Manios10, Johannes Brug11, Nanna Lien1.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of the present study was to explore if children who spend more time on screen-based sedentary behaviors (i.e.TV viewing and computer use) drink more sugar-sweetened soft drinks. The study also assessed whether these associations were independent of individual and home environmental correlates of soft drink consumption and whether they were moderated by parental education.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28182671 PMCID: PMC5300182 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171537
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Total and country-specific characteristics of the study sample (n = 5710).
| Age (SD) | Gender (% girls) | Parental education (% low) | Soft drink intake (ml/day) | TV viewing (min/day) | Computer use (min/day) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 11.6 (0.7) | 53 | 35 | 303 (454) | 108 (60) | 75 (56) |
| Belgium (n = 666) | 11.5 (0.7) | 55 | 16 | 384 (493) | 110 (61) | 72 (53) |
| Greece (n = 891) | 11.3 (0.6) | 55 | 48 | 102 (174) | 124 (57) | 71 (56) |
| Hungary (n = 763) | 12.2 (0.6) | 57 | 42 | 547 (621) | 120 (62) | 93 (62) |
| Netherlands(n = 349) | 11.6 (0.7) | 51 | 22 | 533 (521) | 102 (63) | 86 (63) |
| Norway (n = 718) | 12.0 (0.7) | 52 | 26 | 219 (285) | 99 (52) | 77 (55) |
| Slovenia (n = 897) | 11.4 (0.6) | 53 | 44 | 295 (470) | 113 (63) | 76 (61) |
| Spain (n = 880) | 11.4 (0.6) | 51 | 19 | 181 (304) | 103 (55) | 72 (55) |
| Switzerland (n = 546) | 11.6 (0.8) | 49 | 60 | 369 (502) | 78 (54) | 51 (47) |
Results presented as mean (SD), parental education was defined as low when both parents had less than 14 years of education; it was defined as high when at least one parent had more than 14 years of education
Association between soft drink consumption (ml/day) and TV/computer use (min/day) among study participants.
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Belgium (n = 666) | |||
| TV | |||
| Computer | 0.56 (-0.10–1.23) | 0.11 (-0.53–0.76) | |
| Greece (n = 891) | |||
| TV | |||
| Computer | 0.12 (-0.09–0.33) | ||
| Hungary (n = 763) | |||
| TV | |||
| Computer | |||
| Netherlands (n = 349) | |||
| TV | - 0.22 (-1.31–0.86) | -0.40 (-1.40–0.60) | -0.56 (-1.53–0.41) |
| Computer | 0.002 (-1.05–1.05) | -0.32 (-1.33–0.69) | |
| Norway (n = 718) | |||
| TV | |||
| Computer | 0.35 (-0.05–0.75) | ||
| Slovenia (n = 897) | |||
| TV | 0.49 (-0.06–1.03) | ||
| Computer | |||
| Spain (n = 880) | |||
| TV | |||
| Computer | 0.36 (-0.03–0.76) | 0.23 (-0.16–0.62) | |
| Switzerland (n = 546) | |||
| TV | |||
| Computer | 0.69 (-0.30–1.68) | 0.44 (-0.52–1.40) | 0.33 (-0.57–1.23) |
Dependent variable in the regression analyses = soft drink consumption; independent variable = TV or computer use.
***p<0.001,
**p<0.01,
*p<0.05
$Model 1 was adjusted for age, gender, parental education and the other sedentary behavior
#Model 2 = Model 1 + individual correlates of soft drink consumption (attitude and self-efficacy)
¤Model 3 = Model 2 + home environmental correlates of soft drink consumption (parental modelling, parental rules and availability at home)