Brian E Saelens1,2, Karen Glanz3, Lawrence D Frank4,5, Sarah C Couch6, Chuan Zhou1,2, Trina Colburn1, James F Sallis7. 1. Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, USA. 2. Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA. 3. Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 4. School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 5. Urban Design 4 Health, Inc, Seattle, Washington, USA. 6. Department of Rehabilitation, Exercise, and Nutrition Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. 7. Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine 2-year changes in weight status and behaviors among children living in neighborhoods differing on nutrition and activity environments. METHODS: A prospective observational study, the Neighborhood Impact on Kids study, was conducted in King County, Washington, and San Diego County, California. Children 6 to 12 years old and a parent or caregiver completed Time 1 (n = 681) and Time 2 (n = 618) assessments. Children lived in neighborhoods characterized as "high/favorable" or "low/unfavorable" in nutrition and activity environments, respectively (four neighborhood types). Child BMI z score and overweight or obesity status were primary outcomes, with diet and activity behaviors as behavioral outcomes. RESULTS: After adjusting for sociodemographics and Time 1 values, children living in two of the three less environmentally supportive neighborhoods had significantly less favorable BMI z score changes (+0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-0.21; + 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03-0.21), and all three less supportive neighborhoods had higher overweight or obesity (relative risks, 1.41-1.49; 95% CI: 1.13-1.80) compared with children in the most environmentally supportive neighborhoods. Changes in daily energy intake and sedentary behavior by neighborhood type were consistent with observed weight status changes, with unexpected findings for physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: More walkable and recreation-supportive environments with better nutrition access were associated with better child weight outcomes and related behavior changes.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine 2-year changes in weight status and behaviors among children living in neighborhoods differing on nutrition and activity environments. METHODS: A prospective observational study, the Neighborhood Impact on Kids study, was conducted in King County, Washington, and San Diego County, California. Children 6 to 12 years old and a parent or caregiver completed Time 1 (n = 681) and Time 2 (n = 618) assessments. Children lived in neighborhoods characterized as "high/favorable" or "low/unfavorable" in nutrition and activity environments, respectively (four neighborhood types). Child BMI z score and overweight or obesity status were primary outcomes, with diet and activity behaviors as behavioral outcomes. RESULTS: After adjusting for sociodemographics and Time 1 values, children living in two of the three less environmentally supportive neighborhoods had significantly less favorable BMI z score changes (+0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-0.21; + 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03-0.21), and all three less supportive neighborhoods had higher overweight or obesity (relative risks, 1.41-1.49; 95% CI: 1.13-1.80) compared with children in the most environmentally supportive neighborhoods. Changes in daily energy intake and sedentary behavior by neighborhood type were consistent with observed weight status changes, with unexpected findings for physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: More walkable and recreation-supportive environments with better nutrition access were associated with better child weight outcomes and related behavior changes.
Authors: Jennifer Wolch; Michael Jerrett; Kim Reynolds; Rob McConnell; Roger Chang; Nicholas Dahmann; Kirby Brady; Frank Gilliland; Jason G Su; Kiros Berhane Journal: Health Place Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Mia A Papas; Anthony J Alberg; Reid Ewing; Kathy J Helzlsouer; Tiffany L Gary; Ann C Klassen Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2007-05-28 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Hannah G Lawman; Cheryl D Fryar; Deanna Kruszon-Moran; Brian K Kit; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: James F Sallis; Donald J Slymen; Terry L Conway; Lawrence D Frank; Brian E Saelens; Kelli Cain; James E Chapman Journal: Health Place Date: 2011-03-09 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Cindy W Leung; Barbara A Laraia; Maggi Kelly; Dana Nickleach; Nancy E Adler; Lawrence H Kushi; Irene H Yen Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Michael Jerrett; Rob McConnell; C C Roger Chang; Jennifer Wolch; Kim Reynolds; Frederick Lurmann; Frank Gilliland; Kiros Berhane Journal: Prev Med Date: 2009-10-20 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Laura K Cobb; Lawrence J Appel; Manuel Franco; Jessica C Jones-Smith; Alana Nur; Cheryl A M Anderson Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Dustin T Duncan; Mona Sharifi; Steven J Melly; Richard Marshall; Thomas D Sequist; Sheryl L Rifas-Shiman; Elsie M Taveras Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2014-09-23 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Neta HaGani; Mika R Moran; Or Caspi; Pnina Plaut; Ronit Endevelt; Orna Baron-Epel Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Shannon M Robson; Maya Vadiveloo; Sarah Green; Sarah C Couch; James F Sallis; Karen Glanz; Brian E Saelens Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2020-12-02
Authors: Nicole Farmer; Cristhian A Gutierrez-Huerta; Briana S Turner; Valerie M Mitchell; Billy S Collins; Yvonne Baumer; Gwenyth R Wallen; Tiffany M Powell-Wiley Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-18 Impact factor: 3.390