| Literature DB >> 29500212 |
Yung Liao1,2, Ai Shibata3, Kaori Ishii2, Mohammad Javad Koohsari2,4,5, Koichiro Oka2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examined cross-sectional and 2-year prospective associations of perceived and objectively measured environmental attributes with screen time among middle-aged Japanese adults.Entities:
Keywords: built environment; prospective; screen time
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29500212 PMCID: PMC5855170 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019608
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Characteristics of baseline and follow-up respondents
| Sample for cross-sectional analyses | Sample for prospective analyses | |
| Baseline | ||
| Gender, % men | 512 (51.2) | 276 (51.8) |
| Age, mean (SD) | 55.8 (4.3) | 54.6 (8.3) |
| Marital status, % married | 844 (84.3) | 454 (85.2) |
| Educational attainment, % with tertiary education | 536 (53.6) | 308 (57.8) |
| Household income (yen), % | ||
| <5 000 000 p.a. | 492 (49.2) | 244 (45.8) |
| 5 000 000 p.a.+ | 494 (49.4) | 283 (53.1) |
| Refused to answer or missing | 15 (1.5) | 6 (1.1) |
| Work status, % non-working | 743 (74.2) | 406 (76.2) |
| BMI, mean (SD) | 23 (3.2) | 22.9 (3.3) |
| MVPA (hour/week), mean (SD) | 9.3 (13.4) | 9.2 (12.4) |
| Screen time (hour/day), mean (SD) | 2.3 (1.9) | 2.3 (1.9) |
| Follow-up | ||
| Change in working status | – | |
| Keep working | – | 388 (72.8) |
| Start working | – | 17 (3.2) |
| Stop working | – | 18 (3.4) |
| Not working | – | 110 (20.6) |
| Screen time (hour/day), mean (SD) | – | 2.2 (1.7) |
BMI, body mass index; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; p.a, per annum.
Proportional change (95% CI) in screen time according to objective and perceived environmental attributes at baseline (n=1011)
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||||
| Exp(β) | 95% CI | P value | Exp(β) | 95% CI | P value | |
| Perceived | ||||||
| Residential density (high) | 1.02 | 0.91 to 1.14 | 0.69 | 1.02 | 0.93 to 1.13 | 0.66 |
| Access to destination (good) | 1.10 | 0.99 to 1.22 | 0.06 | 1.12 | 1.02 to 1.23 | 0.02 |
| Access to public transportation (good) | 1.20 | 1.03 to 1.39 | 0.01 | 1.18 | 1.04 to 1.36 | 0.01 |
| Sidewalk (yes) | 1.04 | 0.94 to 1.15 | 0.43 | 1.06 | 0.97 to 1.17 | 0.20 |
| Street connectivity (good) | 1.10 | 0.99 to 1.23 | 0.08 | 1.11 | 1.01 to 1.23 | 0.04 |
| GIS | ||||||
| Residential density (high) | 0.96 | 0.87 to 1.06 | 0.45 | 0.96 | 0.87 to 1.06 | 0.44 |
| Access to destination (good) | 1.07 | 0.96 to 1.18 | 0.21 | 1.05 | 0.96 to 1.16 | 0.29 |
| Access to public transportation (good) | 1.13 | 1.03 to 1.25 | 0.01 | 1.11 | 1.01 to 1.22 | 0.03 |
| Sidewalk (yes) | 0.99 | 0.89 to 1.10 | 0.88 | 0.99 | 0.91 to 1.10 | 0.98 |
| Street connectivity (good) | 0.97 | 0.88 to 1.08 | 0.60 | 1.00 | 0.91 to 1.11 | 0.95 |
Generalised linear model (specifying a gamma distribution and using a log link).
Model 1: unadjusted model; model 2: adjusted for gender, age, marital status, education attainment, household income, employment status, car ownership status, BMI, physical function and MVPA at baseline.
Results of each model are reported as antilogarithms of the regression coefficients (and their respective 95% CI). Coefficients less than 1 denote proportionally less time spent in screen time, whereas coefficients more than 1 denote proportionally more time spent in screen time, relative to the reference category.
*P<0.05.
BMI, body mass index; GIS, geographic information system; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity.
Proportional change (95% CI) in screen time over 2 years according to objective and perceived environmental attributes, after adjusting for baseline leisure-time sitting for transport (n=533)
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||||
| Exp(β) | 95% CI | P value | Exp(β) | 95% CI | P value | |
| Perceived | ||||||
| Residential density (high) | 1.06 | 1.16 to 1.25 | 0.37 | 1.11 | 0.97 to 1.27 | 0.14 |
| Access to destination (good) | 0.96 | 0.84 to 1.10 | 0.54 | 1.00 | 0.88 to 1.14 | 0.97 |
| Access to public transportation (good) | 1.06 | 0.87 to 1.29 | 0.54 | 1.08 | 0.89 to 1.30 | 0.46 |
| Sidewalk (yes) | 0.96 | 0.84 to 1.09 | 0.50 | 0.99 | 0.87 to 1.12 | 0.84 |
| Street connectivity (good) | 1.03 | 0.89 to 1.19 | 0.72 | 1.06 | 0.92 to 1.22 | 0.39 |
| GIS | ||||||
| Residential density (high) | 1.01 | 0.88 to 1.14 | 0.94 | 1.05 | 0.92 to 1.20 | 0.47 |
| Access to destination (good) | 1.06 | 0.93 to 1.20 | 0.41 | 1.07 | 0.94 to 1.23 | 0.29 |
| Access to public transportation (good) | 1.02 | 0.90 to 1.16 | 0.78 | 1.02 | 0.90 to 1.16 | 0.74 |
| Sidewalk (yes) | 1.10 | 0.97 to 1.24 | 0.16 | 1.11 | 0.98 to 1.26 | 0.10 |
| Street connectivity (good) | 1.04 | 0.91 to 1.18 | 0.58 | 1.08 | 0.94 to 1.24 | 0.26 |
Generalised linear model (specifying a gamma distribution and using a log link).
Model 1: unadjusted model; model 2: adjusted for gender, age, marital status, education attainment, household income, BMI, physical function and MVPA at baseline, change in employment status and car ownership.
Results of each model are reported as antilogarithms of the regression coefficients (and their respective 95% CI). Coefficients less than 1 denote proportionally decreased time spent in screen time, whereas coefficients more than 1 denote proportionally increased time spent in screen time, relative to the reference category.
*P<0.05.
BMI, body mass index; GIS, geographic information system; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity.