| Literature DB >> 28326288 |
Naomi Chisuwa-Hayami1, Toshi Haruki1.
Abstract
Background: Body-related teasing is known to be linked to body dissatisfaction and dieting behavior in adolescents. However, little is known about it in non-Western countries. This study aims to examine the prevalence of body-related teasing among Japanese adolescents and its connection to weight status, body image, and dieting behavior to consider implications for public health.Entities:
Keywords: Body image; Bullying; Diet; Japanese; Teasing; Youth
Year: 2016 PMID: 28326288 PMCID: PMC5350554 DOI: 10.15171/hpp.2017.15
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Health Promot Perspect ISSN: 2228-6497
Demographic characteristics of study population in total and by gender
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Gender | ||||||
| Male | 519 | 53.1 | - | - | - | - |
| Female | 459 | 46.9 | - | - | - | - |
| Grade | ||||||
| Year 7 | 522 | 53.4 | 276 | 53.2 | 246 | 53.6 |
| Year 9 | 456 | 46.6 | 243 | 46.8 | 213 | 46.4 |
| Age (years)a | 13.2 (1.08) | 13.2 (1.09) | 13.2 (1.08) | |||
| Degree of obesitya | -2.69 (13.59) | -1.61 (13.58) | -3.91 (13.51) | |||
aMean (SD) is presented for age and degree of obesity.
Prevalence of history of teasing and source of teasing by gender
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| History of teasing | ||||||||
| Yes | 234 | 23.9 | 85 | 16.4 | 149 | 32.5 | <0.001 | 0.19 |
| No | 744 | 76.1 | 434 | 83.6 | 310 | 67.5 | ||
| Source of teasingc | ||||||||
| Friends | 172 | 73.5 | 72 | 84.7 | 100 | 67.1 | 0.003 | 0.19 |
| Family | 126 | 53.8 | 33 | 38.8 | 93 | 62.4 | <0.001 | 0.23 |
| Others | 18 | 7.7 | 3 | 3.5 | 15 | 10.1 | 0.071 | 0.12 |
a P values represent a chi-square test.
b ES: effect size (φ)
c Percentage of source of teasing shows the ratio of total history of teasing in each gender.
Prevalence of history of teasing by weight status and body image by gender
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||||||||
| Weight status | ||||||||||||
| Underweight (n=10) | 1 | 10.0 | <0.001 | 0.21 | 1 | 10.0 | 0.002 | 0.19 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.074 | 0.13 |
| Lower normal weight (n=154) | 20 | 13.0 | 13 | 8.3 | 8 | 3.9 | ||||||
| Middle normal weight (n=157) | 16 | 10.2 | 19 | 12.3 | 6 | 5.1 | ||||||
| Upper normal weight (n=159) | 33 | 20.8 | 28 | 17.6 | 14 | 8.8 | ||||||
| Overweight (n=39) | 15 | 38.5 | 13 | 33.3 | 6 | 15.4 | ||||||
| Body image | ||||||||||||
| Thin (n=134) | 23 | 17.2 | <0.001 | 0.22 | 20 | 14.9 | <0.001 | 0.24 | 10 | 7.5 | 0.023 | 0.13 |
| Normal (n=311) | 36 | 11.6 | 29 | 9.3 | 14 | 4.5 | ||||||
| Fat (n=74) | 26 | 35.1 | 25 | 33.8 | 10 | 13.5 | ||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| Weight status | ||||||||||||
| Underweight (n=27) | 7 | 25.9 | <0.001 | 0.35 | 7 | 25.9 | <0.001 | 0.28 | 2 | 7.4 | <0.001 | 0.28 |
| Lower normal weight (n=132) | 23 | 17.0 | 18 | 13.6 | 17 | 12.9 | ||||||
| Middle normal weight (n=135) | 31 | 23.5 | 18 | 13.3 | 16 | 11.9 | ||||||
| Upper normal weight (n=133) | 67 | 50.4 | 40 | 30.1 | 47 | 35.3 | ||||||
| Overweight (n=32) | 21 | 65.6 | 17 | 53.1 | 11 | 34.4 | ||||||
| Body image | ||||||||||||
| Thin (n=27) | 12 | 44.4 | <0.001 | 0.40 | 12 | 44.4 | <0.001 | 0.31 | 4 | 14.8 | <0.001 | 0.30 |
| Normal (n=232) | 33 | 14.2 | 22 | 9.5 | 21 | 9.1 | ||||||
| Fat (n=200) | 104 | 52.0 | 66 | 33.0 | 68 | 34.0 | ||||||
a P values represent a chi-square test or Fisher extract test.
b ES: Effect size (Cramer’s V)
Logistic regression analysis for history of teasing by weight status and body image by gender (OR [95% CI])
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| Weight status | ||||||
| Underweight (n=10) | 0.98 | (0.12-8.24) | 0.99 | 0.77 | (0.089-6.68) | 0.81 |
| Lower normal weight (n=154) | 0.44 | (0.65-2.65) | 0.44 | 1.06 | (0.51-2.23) | 0.87 |
| Middle normal weight (n=157) | 1.00 | - | <0.001 | 1.00 | - | 0.047 |
| Upper normal weight (n=159) | 2.31 | (1.21-4.39) | 0.011 | 2.36 | (1.20-4.64) | 0.013 |
| Overweight (n=39) | 5.51 | (2.41-12.59) | <0.001 | 3.44 | (1.29-9.21) | 0.014 |
| Body image | ||||||
| Thin (n=134) | 1.58 | (0.90-2.79) | 0.113 | 2.24 | (1.15-4.37) | 0.018 |
| Normal (n=311) | 1.00 | - | <0.001 | 1.00 | - | 0.004 |
| Fat (n=74) | 4.14 | (2.29-7.47) | <0.001 | 2.65 | (1.32-5.31) | 0.006 |
|
| - | - | 0.96 | - | - | 0.82 |
|
| ||||||
| Weight status | ||||||
| Underweight (n=27) | 1.14 | (0.44-2.95) | 0.79 | 0.84 | (0.27-2.64) | 0.77 |
| Lower normal weight (n=132) | 0.67 | (0.37-1.22) | 0.19 | 0.74 | (0.38-1.45) | 0.38 |
| Middle normal weight (n=135) | 1.00 | - | <0.001 | 1.00 | - | - |
| Upper normal weight (n=133) | 3.31 | (1.95-5.60) | <0.001 | 2.36 | (1.35-4.13) | 0.003 |
| Overweight (n=32) | 6.22 | (2.70-14.31) | <0.001 | 3.42 | (1.43-8.18) | 0.006 |
| Body image | ||||||
| Thin (n=27) | 4.82 | (2.08-11.22) | <0.001 | 6.48 | (2.53-16.61) | <0.001 |
| Normal (n=232) | 1.00 | - | <0.001 | 1.00 | - | <0.001 |
| Fat (n=200) | 6.53 | (4.12-10.36) | <0.001 | 3.96 | (2.36-6.63) | <0.001 |
|
| - | - | 0.57 | - | - | 0.96 |
Abbreviaton: OR, odds ratio.
a P values represent test for association in logistic regression analysis.
Note: Variables in italics are covariates.
Prevalence of dieting behaviors by history of teasing by gender
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| History of teasing | |||||||||||
| Total | |||||||||||
| Yes | 85 | 22 | 25.9 | <0.001 | 0.25 | 149 | 69 | 46.3 | <0.001 | 0.23 | |
| No | 434 | 26 | 6.0 | 310 | 72 | 23.2 | |||||
| Friends | |||||||||||
| Yes | 74 | 19 | 25.7 | <0.001 | 0.23 | 100 | 46 | 46.0 | <0.001 | 0.18 | |
| No | 445 | 29 | 6.5 | 359 | 95 | 26.5 | |||||
| Family | |||||||||||
| Yes | 34 | 10 | 29.4 | <0.001 | 0.18 | 93 | 45 | 48.4 | <0.001 | 0.19 | |
| No | 485 | 38 | 7.8 | 366 | 96 | 26.2 | |||||
a P values represent a chi-square test or Fisher extract test.
b ES: Effect size (φ).
c N represents number reporting teasing (yes or no).
d n represents number reporting dieting behaviors.
Logistic regression analysis for dieting behaviors by history of teasing by gender [OR (95% CI)]
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||
| Total history of teasing (yes) | 5.48 | (2.93-10.26) | <0.001 | 4.06 | (2.08-7.93) | <0.001 |
|
| - | - | 0.093 | 2.20 | (1.13-4.29) | 0.021 |
|
| 1.34 | (1.21-1.48) | <0.001 | 1.05 | (1.03-1.07) | <0.001 |
| Teasing by friends (yes) | 4.96 | (2.61-9.43) | <0.001 | 3.62 | (1.81-7.23) | <0.001 |
|
| - | - | 0.093 | - | - | 0.15 |
|
| 1.34 | (1.21-1.48) | <0.001 | 1.17 | (1.16-1.43) | <0.001 |
| Teasing by family (yes) | 4.90 | (2.18-11.00) | <0.001 | 3.67 | (1.52-8.86) | 0.0 |
|
| - | - | 0.093 | - | - | 0.11 |
|
| 1.34 | (1.21-1.48) | <0.001 | 1.32 | (1.19-1.46) | <0.001 |
|
| ||||||
| Total history of teasing (yes) | 2.85 | (1.88-4.32) | <0.001 | 2.40 | (1.53-3.75) | <0.001 |
|
| 2.16 | (1.44-3.23) | <0.001 | 2.31 | (1.51-3.52) | <0.001 |
|
| 1.20 | (1.11-1.30) | <0.001 | 1.02 | (1.01-1.04) | 0.01 |
| Teasing by friends (yes) | 2.37 | (1.50-3.74) | <0.001 | 1.93 | (1.18-3.14) | 0.008 |
|
| 2.16 | (1.44-3.23) | <0.001 | 1.95 | (1.28-2.96) | 0.002 |
|
| 1.20 | (1.11-1.30) | <0.001 | 1.16 | (1.07-1.25) | <0.001 |
| Teasing by family (yes) | 2.64 | (1.65-4.21) | <0.001 | 2.02 | (1.23-3.33) | 0.006 |
|
| 2.16 | (1.44-3.23) | <0.001 | 1.89 | (1.24-2.88) | 0.003 |
|
| 1.20 | (1.11-1.30) | <0.001 | 1.15 | (1.23-3.33) | 0.001 |
Abbreviaton: OR, odds ratio.
a P values represent test for association in logistic regression analysis.
Note: Variables in italics are covariates.