| Literature DB >> 29791516 |
Stefanie A J Koch1, Ute Alexy1, Tanja Diederichs1,2, Anette E Buyken1,2, Sarah Roßbach1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Restrained Eating, i.e. the tendency to restrict dietary intake to control body-weight, often emerges during adolescence and may result in changes in circadian eating patterns.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29791516 PMCID: PMC5965828 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197131
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of DONALD-study participants (n = 209) stratified by tertiles of restrained eating behavior (RE) presented separately for boys (n = 101) and girls (n = 108).
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | |
| n (questionnaires/dietary records) | 73 | 73 | 67 | 74 | 62 | 69 |
| n (participants) | 56 | 53 | 53 | 57 | 44 | 46 |
| Age [years] | 14 (11; 18) | 14 (11; 15) | 14 (13; 18) | 14 (12; 18) | 14 (11; 17) | 14 (11; 18) |
| RE Score [0–30] | 0 (0; 1) | 0 (0; 2) | 5 (4; 7) | 6 (5; 8) | 13.5 (11; 16) | 15 (12; 19) |
| Minimum | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 10 |
| Maximum | 2 | 2 | 8 | 9 | 20 | 24 |
| ATO [years] | 11 (10; 11) | 9 (8; 9) | 10 (10; 11) | 9 (8; 9) | 11 (10; 11) | 9 (8; 10) |
| BMI-SDS | -0.23 (-0.96; 0.39) | -0.46 (-1.12; 0.21) | 0.00 (-0.77; 0.58) | 0.09 (-0.43; 0.52) | 0.78 (0.41; 1.66) | 0.83 (0.28; 1.20) |
| Body weight status | ||||||
| Normal weight [n (%)] | 58 (80) | 57 (78) | 55 (82) | 68 (92) | 38 (61) | 53 (77) |
| Underweight [n (%)] | 11 (15) | 15 (21) | 6 (9) | 3 (4) | 2 (3) | 1 (1) |
| Overweight [n (%)] | 3 (4) | 1 (1) | 6 (9) | 2 (3) | 13 (21) | 8 (12) |
| Obesity [n (%)] | 1 (1) | - | - | 1 (1) | 9 (15) | 7 (10) |
| Breast-fed ≥ 4 months [n (%)] | 50 (69) | 48 (66) | 43 (64) | 51 (69) | 43 (69) | 47 (68) |
| Maternal overweight | 28 (38) | 28 (38) | 25 (37) | 31 (42) | 23 (37) | 35 (51) |
| High maternal educational status | 47 (64) | 54 (74) | 50 (75) | 54 (73) | 41 (66) | 53 (77) |
| Maternal employment [n (%)] | 53 (73) | 59 (81) | 53 (79) | 57 (77) | 53 (86) | 54 (78) |
Presented values are medians (25th; 75th percentile) or frequencies (%) and are based upon 418 questionnaires on restrained eating and parallel 3-day-weighed dietary records of 209 DONALD-study participants
Abbreviations: ATO ≙ Age at Take-Off, BMI ≙ Body Mass Index, SDS ≙ Standard Deviation Score, %E ≙ percentage of total energy intake
a Overweight: >90th percentile/Obesity: >97th percentile/Underweight: <10th percentile of BMI-SDS based on German reference curves [43],
b BMI ≥25,
c ≥12 years of schooling
Dietary characteristics of DONALD-study participants (n = 209) stratified by tertiles of restrained eating behavior (RE) presented separately for boys (n = 101) and girls (n = 108).
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | ♂ | ♀ | |
| Number of recorded weekdays | ||||||
| 1 [n (%)] | 31 (42) | 29 (40) | 19 (28) | 24 (32) | 25 (40) | 21 (30) |
| 2 [n (%)] | 19 (26) | 13 (18) | 11 (17) | 17 (23) | 13 (21) | 12 (17) |
| 3 [n (%)] | 23 (32) | 31 (42) | 37 (55) | 33 (45) | 24 (39) | 36 (52) |
| Total energy intake [kcal] | 2270 (1985; 2653) | 1809 (1561; 1982) | 2166 (1912; 2543) | 1712 (1483; 1991) | 2059 (1748; 2688) | 1604 (1388; 1998) |
| Morning energy intake [%E] | 22.1 (14.6; 29.7) | 25.6 (19.6; 30.3) | 24.1 (18.8; 33.2) | 25.5 (18.0; 32.2) | 23.2 (17.7; 28.3) | 25.8 (20.3; 34.4) |
| No energy intake in the morning | ||||||
| Never [n (%)] | 54 (74) | 61 (84) | 54 (81) | 55 (74) | 45 (72) | 57 (83) |
| On 1 day [n (%)] | 8 (11) | 9 (12) | 8 (12) | 13 (18) | 13 (21) | 8 (11) |
| On 2 days [n (%)] | 6 (8) | 2 (3) | 4 (6) | 4 (5) | 3 (5) | 4 (6) |
| On 3 days [n (%)] | 5 (7) | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 2 (3) | 1 (2) | - |
| Evening energy intake [%E] | 33.0 (28.0; 39.3) | 29.4 (24.1; 34.5) | 31.0 (23.7; 39.8) | 27.6 (20.8; 37.0) | 30.6 (26.3; 35.8) | 26.5 (20.9; 35.1) |
| No energy intake in the evening | ||||||
| Never [n (%)] | 66 (90) | 62 (85) | 63 (94) | 60 (81) | 57 (92) | 60 (87) |
| On 1 day [n (%)] | 7 (10) | 7 (10) | 4 (6) | 9 (12) | 5 (8) | 8 (12) |
| On 2 days [n (%)] | - | 4 (5) | - | 5 (7) | - | 1 (1) |
| On 3 days [n (%)] | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Eating occasion frequency [n/day] | 5.3 (4.7; 6.3) | 5.3 (4.7; 6.0) | 5.3 (4.7; 6.0) | 5.2 (4.7; 5.7) | 5.3 (4.7; 6.3) | 5.0 (4.0; 5.7) |
| Snack frequency [n/day] | 1.3 (0.7; 2.0) | 1.3 (0.7; 2.0) | 1.7 (0.7; 2.3) | 1.3 (0.7; 2.0) | 1.3 (1.0; 2.3) | 1.3 (0.7; 1.7) |
Presented values are medians (25th; 75th percentile) or frequencies (%) and are based upon 418 questionnaires on restrained eating and parallel 3-day-weighed dietary records of 209 DONALD-study participants
Abbreviations: %E ≙ percentage of total energy intake
Characteristics of circadian eating patterns stratified by tertiles of restrained eating behavior—Results of cross-sectional analyses (n = 418 measurements from 209 participants).
| Restrained Eating | p | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tertile 1 | Tertile 2 | Tertile 3 | ||
| Model A | 2012 (1926; 2101) | 1957 (1870; 2048) | 1813 (1734; 1897) | <0.0001 |
| Model B | 2025 (1937; 2118) | 1963 (1875; 2055) | 1797 (1713; 1885) | <0.0001 |
| Model A | 5.3 (5.1; 5.5) | 5.4 (5.2; 5.6) | 5.2 (5.0; 5.4) | 0.07 |
| Model B | 5.3 (5.1; 5.5) | 5.4 (5.2; 5.6) | 5.2 (5.0; 5.4) | 0.20 |
| Model A | 1.4 (1.2; 1.6) | 1.5 (1.3; 1.7) | 1.4 (1.2; 1.6) | 0.49 |
| Model B | 1.4 (1.2; 1.6) | 1.5 (1.3; 1.7) | 1.4 (1.2; 1.6) | 0.55 |
| Boys | ||||
| Model A | 22.5 (20.1; 24.9) | 25.0 (22.5; 27.6) | 22.3 (19.7; 25.0) | 0.34 |
| Model B | 22.6 (20.1; 25.1) | 25.3 (22.7; 27.8) | 21.8 (19.0; 24.6) | 0.19 |
| Model C | 26.5 (24.1; 28.8) | 26.9 (24.3; 29.5) | 25.6 (23.1; 28.2 | 0.15 |
| Girls | ||||
| Model A | 25.1 (22.7; 27.4) | 26.5 (24.2; 28.6) | 27.8 (25.5; 30.0) | 0.01 |
| Model B | 25.2 (22.6; 27.6) | 26.6 (24.3; 28.7) | 27.7 (25.2; 30.1) | 0.03 |
| Model C | 27.9 (25.5; 30.1) | 29.8 (27.7; 31.9) | 29.2 (26.8; 31.5) | 0.17 |
| Model A | 31.3 (29.6; 33.1) | 30.2 (28.4; 32.1) | 29.8 (27.9; 31.6) | 0.36 |
| Model B | 31.7 (29.9; 33.5) | 30.3 (28.4; 32.1) | 29.3 (27.4; 31.3) | 0.12 |
| Model C | 33.2 (31.5; 35.0) | 32.2 (30.5; 34.0) | 30.7 (28.9; 32.6) | 0.06 |
Presented values are least squares means (95% confidence interval) and are based upon 418 questionnaires on restrained eating and parallel 3-day-weighed dietary records of 209 DONALD-study participants
Abbreviations: %E ≙ percentage of total energy intake
a Model A: adjusted for age. Model B: adjustment like in model A plus BMI-SDS, maternal educational status, maternal employment.
b Additional analysis: adjustment like in model B, n = 153 questionnaires with parallel dietary records
c Additional analysis: adjustment like in model B, n = 173 questionnaires with parallel dietary records
d Additional analysis: adjustment like in model B, n = 368 questionnaires with parallel dietary records
Associations between changes (Δ) in restrained eating behavior and changes in characteristics of circadian eating patterns (mean time span of 4 years)—Results of change-on-change-analyses (n = 209).
| Δ Restrained Eating | ||
|---|---|---|
| β (95% CI) | p | |
| Model A | -0.04 (-0.07; -0.00) | 0.03 |
| Model B | -0.04 (-0.08; -0.01) | 0.02 |
| Model A | -0.03 (-0.07; 0.00) | 0.09 |
| Model B | -0.03 (-0.07; 0.00) | 0.07 |
| Model A | -0.04 (-0.38; 0.29) | 0.80 |
| Model B | -0.02 (-0.37; 0.33) | 0.91 |
| Model C | -0.18 (-0.56; 0.21) | 0.36 |
| Model A | -0.32 (-0.65; -0.00) | 0.05 |
| Model B | -0.33 (-0.66; 0.01) | 0.06 |
| Model C | -0.36 (-0.70; -0.03) | 0.04 |
Values are based upon data of 209 DONALD-study participants providing questionnaires on RE with parallel 3-day dietary records for two different time points (Baseline and Endpoint) to calculate changes (Δ) by subtracting endpoint from baseline values.
Abbreviations: %E ≙ percentage of total energy intake
a Model A: adjusted for age at baseline, time between baseline and endpoint, restrained eating score at baseline. Model B: adjustment like in model A plus change in BMI-SDS, maternal educational status at baseline and maternal employment at baseline.
b Additional analysis: adjustment like in model B, n = 130 study participants
c Additional analysis: adjustment like in model B, n = 168 study participants