| Literature DB >> 29808319 |
Pamela Qualter1, Ruth Hurley2, Alice Eccles2, Janice Abbott2, Michel Boivin3, Richard Tremblay4.
Abstract
Adolescents who do not conform to weight ideals are vulnerable to disapproval and victimization from peers in school. But, missing from the literature is a prospective examination of weight status and feelings of loneliness that might come from those experiences. Using data from the Québec Longitudinal Study of Child Development, we filled that gap by examining the prospective associations between loneliness and weight status when the sample was aged 10-13 years. At ages 10, 12, and 13 years, 1042 youth (572 females; 92% from French speaking homes) reported on their loneliness and were weighed and measured. Family income sufficiency was included in our analyses given its relationship with weight status, but also its possible link with loneliness during early adolescence. The findings showed that (1) weight status and loneliness were not associated concurrently; (2) weight status predicted increases in loneliness from ages 12 to 13 years; and (3) loneliness predicted increases in weight from ages 12 to 13 years among female adolescents, but weight loss among male adolescents. The fact that loneliness was involved in weight gain for females suggests that interventions focused on reducing loneliness and increasing connection with peers during early adolescence could help in reducing obesity.Entities:
Keywords: Body mass index; Coping; Income sufficiency; Loneliness; Obesity; Socioeconomic status
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29808319 PMCID: PMC6002443 DOI: 10.1007/s10964-018-0867-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Youth Adolesc ISSN: 0047-2891
Characteristics of the Sample at the Start of the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development (QLSCD) survey and at T1–T3 of the current study
| Time point | Age of participants in months (SD) | n = |
|---|---|---|
| Start of QLSCD survey in 1998 | 4.5 (0.55) | 2120 |
| T1 current study | 121.70 (3.10) | 1042 |
| T2 current study | 145.60 (3.05) | 1042 |
| T3 current study | 157.60 (3.12) | 1042 |
aStatistics Canada’s low-income cut-offs (LICOs) were used to categorize the families of participants on income sufficiency. LICOs are income thresholds at which a family would typically spend 20% more of its income than the average family on the necessities of food, shelter, and clothing. Families are classified as having “sufficient income” when the household income is above the low-income threshold determined by Statistics Canada in any given year. When income is between 60 and 90% of the low-income threshold, households are classified as having “insufficient income”; income levels below 60% of the low-income threshold are considered as “very insufficient”
QLSCD Quebec longitudinal study of child development
Mean (and standard deviations) for loneliness in each weight category at each time point for females and males
| Time (age) | Underweight | Normal range | Overweight | Obese | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females | Males | Females | Males | Females | Males | Females | Males | |
| T1 (10 year) | 3.64 (.93) | 43.46 (.95) | 3.82 (1.19) | 3.88 (1.23) | 3.97 (1.33) | 3.86 (1.29) | 4.03 (1.27) | 3.72 (.96) |
| 36 | 26 | 407 | 325 | 99 | 90 | 30 | 29 | |
| T2 (12 year) | 3.71 (.86) | 3.28 (.61) | 3.76 (1.19) | 3.81 (1.25) | 3.90 (1.17) | 3.73 (1.09) | 3.97 (1.17) | 3.58 (.97) |
| 35 | 25 | 384 | 311 | 116 | 98 | 37 | 36 | |
| T3 (13 year) | 3.80 (1.10) | 3.93 (1.51) | 3.83 (1.31) | 3.92 (1.29) | 3.85 (1.14) | 4.06 (1.43) | 3.84 (1.26) | 3.82 (1.29) |
| 30 | 28 | 384 | 299 | 120 | 105 | 38 | 38 | |
Notes: Sample participants were categorized using the following recommendations from The International Obesity Task Force BMI (IOTF; Cole et al. 2007): thin grade III (BMI ≤ 16), thin grade II (BMI ≤ 17 & > 16), thin grade I (BMI ≤ 18.5 & > 17), overweight (BMI ≥ 25 & < 30), obese (BMI ≥ 30), morbid obesity (BMI > 30), and normal weight (BMI ≥ 18.6 & < 24.5). Underweight = Grade I, II, III were combined due to low numbers in Grades II and III; Obese (obese and morbid obese were combined due to low numbers in the morbid obese category); Possible loneliness scores ranged from 3 to 9. N = 1042 (Female = 572; Male = 470). ANOVAs revealed no differences between males and females on feelings of loneliness at each time point
Mean (and standard deviations) for BMI by loneliness group at each time point for females and males
| Time | Frequently lonely | Not lonely/Sometimes lonely | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Females | Males | Females | Males | |
| T1 (10 year) | 19.26 (4.17) | 17.76 (2.32) | 18.28 (3.11) | 18.25 (2.06) |
| N = 1042 | 66 | 54 | 506 | 416 |
| T2 (12 year) | 20.63 (3.43) | 19.86 (3.92) | 19.98 (3.88) | 19.84 (3.76) |
| N = 1042 | 60 | 49 | 512 | 421 |
| T3 (13 year) | 21.82 (5.39) | 22.52 (5.11) | 20.80 (3.84) | 20.56 (3.79) |
| N = 1042 | 69 | 69 | 503 | 401 |
Notes: Those in the “Frequently Lonely” group scored 6 or above on the loneliness scale; those scoring between 3 and 5 were classified as “Not Lonely/Sometimes Lonely”; N = 1042 (Female = 572; Male = 470); T-tests showed no differences on BMI between same sex peers in the “Frequently Lonely” and “Not Lonely/Sometimes Lonely” groups at ages 10 and 12 years. At age 13 years, males in the “Frequently Lonely” group scored significantly higher on BMI compared to their same sex peers in the “Not Lonely/Sometimes Lonely” group; there were no significant differences between females. All BMI mean scores would be considered in the normal range according to The International Obesity Task Force BMI Cut-offs (IOTF; Cole et al. 2007) where normal weight is considered to be BMI ≥ 18.6 & < 24.5
Fig. 1Weight Status at T2 (age 12 years) and Loneliness at T3 (13 years)
Fig. 2Slopes of the relation between loneliness T2 (age 12 years) and BMI T3 (age 13 years) as a function of gender