| Literature DB >> 28558747 |
Flo Harrison1,2, Anna Goodman3,2, Esther M F van Sluijs4,5, Lars Bo Andersen6, Greet Cardon7, Rachel Davey8, Kathleen F Janz9, Susi Kriemler10, Lynn Molloy11, Angie S Page12, Russ Pate13, Jardena J Puder14, Luis B Sardinha15, Anna Timperio16, Niels Wedderkopp17, Andy P Jones1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Globally most children do not engage in enough physical activity. Day length and weather conditions have been identified as determinants of physical activity, although how they may be overcome as barriers is not clear. We aim to examine if and how relationships between children's physical activity and weather and day length vary between countries and identify settings in which children were better able to maintain activity levels given the weather conditions they experienced.Entities:
Keywords: Adolescent; Child; ICAD; Physical activity; Season; Weather
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28558747 PMCID: PMC5450267 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-017-0526-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Characteristics of study participants
| Participant Characteristics. N (% of study) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genderc | Age band | Weight statusd | |||||||||
| Study | Location | Months | Study Typea | N Participantsb | N daysb | Female | 3–5 years | 6–12 years | 13–18 years | Over weight | Obese |
| ALSPAC | Bristol, UK | Jan-Dec* | Long | 6613 (28%) | 61,101 (38%) | 3449 (52%) | 0 (0%) | 4202 (64%) | 2411 (36%) | 1094 (17%) | 314 (5%) |
| Ballabeina | Aarau, Switzerland | Aug-Sep | Int | 375 (2%) | 1496 (1%) | 185 (49%) | 336 (90%) | 39 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 29 (8%) | 14 (4%) |
| Belgium Pre-School Study | Antwerp, Belgium | Feb-Mar, Oct-Dec | CS | 430 (2%) | 1303 (1%) | 225 (52%) | 411 (96%) | 19 (4%) | 0 (0%) | 50 (12%) | 56 (13%) |
| CHAMPS (UK) | Stoke-on-Trent, UK | Nov-Mar, May | CS | 529 (2%) | 2399 (2%) | 257 (49%) | 82 (16%) | 291 (55%) | 156 (29%) | 96 (18%) | 38 (7%) |
| CLAN | Melbourne, Australia | Jul-Dec* | Long | 1115 (5%) | 9426 (6%) | 593 (53%) | 54 (5%) | 812 (73%) | 249 (22%) | 241 (22%) | 100 (9%) |
| CoSCIS | Copenhagen, Denmark | Dec-Jun* | Int | 674 (3%) | 3523 (2%) | 317 (47%) | 4 (1%) | 670 (99%) | 0 (0%) | 78 (12%) | 29 (4%) |
| EYHS Denmark | Copenhagen, Denmark | Jan-Dec* | Long | 1365 (6%) | 7223 (5%) | 755 (55%) | 0 (0%) | 790 (58%) | 575 (42%) | 172 (13%) | 28 (2%) |
| EYHS Estonia | Tartu, Estonia | Aug-May* | CS | 651 (3%) | 2246 (1%) | 360 (55%) | 0 (0%) | 335 (51%) | 316 (49%) | 55 (8%) | 6 (1%) |
| EYHS Norway | Oslo, Norway | Feb, Apr-Jun, Oct, Nov | CS | 248 (1%) | 650 (0%) | 120 (48%) | 0 (0%) | 248 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 22 (9%) | 2 (1%) |
| EYHS Portugal | Funchal, Madeira | Jan-Jul* | Long | 748 (3%) | 1950 (1%) | 388 (52%) | 0 (0%) | 462 (62%) | 286 (38%) | 130 (17%) | 52 (7%) |
| HEAPS | Melbourne, Australia | Feb-Dec* | Long | 1368 (6%) | 8219 (5%) | 723 (53%) | 276 (20%) | 1003 (73%) | 89 (7%) | 283 (21%) | 120 (9%) |
| Iowa Bone Development Study | Des Moines, USA | Sep-Nov | Long | 604 (3%) | 7300 (5%) | 305 (50%) | 75 (12%) | 429 (71%) | 100 (17%) | 95 (16%) | 139 (23%) |
| KISS | Aarau, Switzerland | Aug-Sep, Nov | Int | 427 (2%) | 2334 (1%) | 219 (51%) | 0 (0%) | 427 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 48 (11%) | 33 (8%) |
| MAGIC | Glasgow, UK | Sep-Nov | CS | 429 (2%) | 2080 (1%) | 215 (50%) | 429 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 70 (16%) | 17 (4%) |
| PEACH | Bristol, UK | Jan-Apr, Jun, Jul, Sep-Dec * | Long | 1204 (5%) | 10,011 (6%) | 619 (51%) | 0 (0%) | 1204 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 216 (18%) | 71 (6%) |
| SPEEDY | Norwich, UK | Feb-Jul | CS | 1977 (8%) | 9761 (6%) | 1101 (56%) | 0 (0%) | 1977 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 358 (18%) | 116 (6%) |
| Project TAAG | Columbia (SC), USA | Jan-Mar* | Int | 754 (3%) | 4070 (3%) | 754 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 203 (27%) | 551 (73%) | 164 (22%) | 127 (17%) |
| Minneapolis, USA | Jan-Apr* | 880 (4%) | 5633 (4%) | 880 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 177 (20%) | 703 (80%) | 159 (18%) | 69 (8%) | ||
| New Orleans, USA | Jan-Apr* | 693 (3%) | 3907 (2%) | 693 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 200 (29%) | 493 (71%) | 171 (25%) | 136 (20%) | ||
| San Diego, USA | Jan-Apr* | 869 (4%) | 5185 (3%) | 869 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 212 (24%) | 657 (76%) | 193 (22%) | 138 (16%) | ||
| Tucson, USA | Jan-Apr* | 653 (3%) | 4113 (3%) | 653 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 234 (36%) | 419 (64%) | 127 (19%) | 59 (9%) | ||
| Washington DC, USA | Jan-May* | 845 (4%) | 4894 (3%) | 845 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 194 (23%) | 651 (77%) | 169 (20%) | 111 (13%) | ||
| All | 23,451 (100%) | 158,824 (100%) | 14,525 (62%) | 1667 (7%) | 14,128 (60%) | 7656 (33%) | 4020 (17%) | 1775 (8%) | |||
* Study collected valid physical activity data for at least 1/3 of the year (120 days)
aAbbreviations for study type: Long Longitudinal, Int Intervention, CS Cross-sectional
bNumber in individual study, and % contribution to total sample
cref. Male
dref. not overweight or obese (including underweight)
Fig. 1Flow chart of the study sample selection
Fig. 2Summary of weather conditions over the data collection period by city. Variables shown are mean daily Temperature (°C; ), mean daily wind speed (kph; +), mean daily visibility (km; ), % of measurement days with snow lying on the ground (○), and mean daily precipitation (mm; ◆)
Results of multilevel model of log cpm 7 am-9 pm
| Univariate associationsa | Fully adjusted model | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | lower | upper |
| β | lower | upper |
| |
| Wear time 7 am-9 pm (hours) | 0.021 | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| ||||
| Age (years) | −0.054 | −0.056 | −0.053 |
| ||||
| Sex (Female) | −0.174 | −0.183 | −0.165 |
| ||||
| Overweight/obese (vs normal weight) | −0.051 | −0.060 | −0.042 |
| ||||
| Weekend (vs weekday) | −0.038 | −0.043 | −0.034 |
| ||||
| Day length (hours) | 0.021 | 0.019 | 0.022 |
| 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.017 |
|
| Temperature (10 deg. C) | 0.060 | 0.046 | 0.073 |
| 0.057 | 0.043 | 0.071 |
|
| Temperature 2 | 0.020 | 0.012 | 0.028 |
| 0.013 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
|
| Temperature 3 | −0.009 | −0.013 | −0.006 |
| −0.009 | −0.013 | −0.006 |
|
| One day lag Temperature | 0.013 | 0.000 | 0.027 |
| −0.012 | −0.026 | 0.002 |
|
| One day lag Temperature 2 | 0.013 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| 0.010 | 0.001 | 0.018 | 0.031 |
| One day lag Temperature 3 | −0.010 | −0.013 | −0.007 |
| −0.006 | −0.009 | −0.002 |
|
| Precipitation (cm) | −0.034 | −0.038 | −0.031 |
| −0.027 | −0.031 | −0.023 |
|
| One day lag Precipitation | −0.007 | −0.010 | −0.003 |
| −0.007 | −0.011 | −0.003 |
|
| Visibility (10 km) | 0.024 | 0.021 | 0.027 |
| 0.021 | 0.018 | 0.024 |
|
| One day lag Visibility | −0.004 | −0.007 | −0.001 |
| −0.008 | −0.011 | −0.005 |
|
| Wind speed (10 kph) | −0.022 | −0.026 | −0.019 |
| −0.021 | −0.025 | −0.018 |
|
| One day lag Wind speed | 0.002 | −0.001 | 0.005 |
| 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.007 |
|
| Snow lying on ground? (vs none) | −0.034 | −0.052 | −0.017 |
| −0.003 | −0.021 | 0.016 |
|
| One day lag Snow lying on ground? | −0.017 | −0.035 | 0.000 | 0.052 | −0.011 | −0.029 | 0.008 |
|
aUnivariate associations all adjusted for individual level variables: wear time, age, sex, weight status and weekend/weekday.
For all p values, bold font indicates p < 0.01, regular font indicates p < 0.05, and italic font indicates p > 0.05.
Fig. 3Adjusted mean cpm 7 am-9 pm at centiles (1st-99th) of day length and weather variables. Adjusted for wear time, age, sex, weight status, weekend/weekday, and all other weather/day length variables
Fig. 4Graphic illustration of interactions between weather variables and demographic factors. All figures show adjusted mean cpm 7 am-9 pm at centiles (1st-99th) of (a) Visibility stratified by temperature, (b) Visibility stratified by day length, (c) Precipitation stratified by age, and (d) Temperature stratified by age. All models adjusted for wear time, age, sex, weight status, weekend/weekday, weather variables and day length. p values are for regression coefficients in stratified models
Fig. 5Random slopes and intercepts for (a) Day length, (b) Precipitation, (c) Temperature, (d) Visibility, by Setting. Lines are shaded by region ( Northern Europe, Australia, Western Europe, and USA). All lines are plotted between 5th and 95th centile values of the independent variables by setting
Fig. 6Setting level (random intercept) effects (with 95% CI) on log cpm for fully adjusted 4-level models (as presented in Table 2). Ranks of random effects given for: Model 1 = Null model (no explanatory variables), Model 2 = model with individual level covariates only (wear time, age, sex, weight status, weekday vs weekend day), and Model 3 = Fully Adjusted model (as plotted) with covariates, all weather variables and day length. Markers indicate study location in: ◆ Northern Europe, ► Western Europe, ■ USA, × Australia