| Literature DB >> 32384784 |
Joanna Myszkowska-Ryciak1, Anna Harton1, Ewa Lange1, Wacław Laskowski2, Agata Wawrzyniak3, Jadwiga Hamulka3, Danuta Gajewska1.
Abstract
Screen time (ST) not only affects physical activity but can also be associated with dietary behaviors. Both of these factors determine the health and development of adolescents. The aims of the study were: 1. to analyze the relationship between ST and nutritional behaviors among adolescents; 2. to examine this association in relation to body weight status. Data on the ST duration and nutritional behaviors were collected using a questionnaire. Body mass status was assessed based on weight and height measurements. A total of 14,044 students aged 13-19 years old from 207 schools participated in the study. A significant relationship between ST and gender, age and type of school was observed, but not body weight status. The average ST duration increased with age (from 2.6 h among 13 years old to 3.2 h among 19 years old), and was significantly higher among boys in all age categories (2.7 h vs. 2.5 h in the youngest age group, and 3.5 h vs. 3.0 h in the oldest age group, respectively). The chance for meeting the recommendation for ST in a group of girls (regardless of age) was almost 50% higher compared to boys. Meeting ST recommendation (≤2 h) was associated with a greater odds ratio for favorable nutritional behaviors in the whole group, with exception of drinking milk or milk beverages, and significantly reduced the odds ratio of adverse dietary behaviors (drinking sweet beverages, consumption of sweets and fast food) in the whole group and by gender. More research is needed to clarify the possible cause-and-effect relationships between ST and dietary behaviors.Entities:
Keywords: adolescents; body weight status; dietary behaviors; screen time
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32384784 PMCID: PMC7285006 DOI: 10.3390/nu12051323
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Descriptive statistics: anthropometric data and the average screen time duration (all data expressed as mean ± SD).
| Age | Height | Weight | BMI | Screen Time | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | |
| 13 | 160.8 ± 6.5 a | 163.4 ± 8.6 b | 51.6 ± 10.9 a | 54.5± 12.8 b | 19.9 ± 3.520.3 ± 3.4 A | 20.3 ± 3.820.6 ± 3.5 B | 2.5 ± 1.5 A | 2.7 ± 1.6 B |
A,B significant differences between girls and boys, the Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.05; a,b significant differences between girls and boys, the Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.001.
Characteristics of the study group (n = 14,044), depending on the screen time (ST) duration and the odds ratio (OR; CI, confidence interval) for screen time duration within the recommendations (≤ 2 h) depending of analyzed factors.
| Factor | Total | ST ≤ 2 h | ST > 2 h | OR for ST ≤ 2 h | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | < 0.001 */0.10 | ||||
| Girls | 53.8 | 59.6 | 49.6 | 1.499 (1.401–1.605) ** | |
| Boys | 46.2 | 40.4 | 50.4 | 0.667 (0.623–0.714) ** | |
| Age [years] | < 0.001 */0.07 | ||||
| 13 | 9.0 | 11.1 | 7.6 | 1.0 (reference) | |
| 14 | 13.3 | 14.8 | 12.3 | 0.820 (0.711–0.946) ** | |
| 15 | 14.3 | 13.7 | 14.7 | 0.639 (0.554–0.736) ** | |
| 16 | 17.0 | 16.4 | 17.4 | 0.643 (0.561–0.738) ** | |
| 17 | 19.8 | 19.3 | 20.2 | 0.654 (0.573–0.748) ** | |
| 18 | 18.2 | 17.2 | 18.9 | 0.623 (0.544–0.714) ** | |
| 19 | 8.3 | 7.5 | 8.9 | 0.575 (0.489–0.676) ** | |
| Type of school | < 0.001 */0.04 | ||||
| secondary | 42.1 | 44.5 | 40.4 | 1.185 (1.107–1.269) ** | |
| upper secondary | 57.9 | 55.5 | 59.6 | 0.844 (0.788–0.903) ** | |
| Body weight status | 0.680 | ||||
| underweight | 5.1 | 4.9 | 5.2 | 0.926 (0.793–1.082) | |
| normal | 76.7 | 77.0 | 76.4 | 1.0 (reference) | |
| overweight | 11.6 | 11.4 | 11.8 | 0.959 (0.863–1.067) | |
| obesity | 6.6 | 6.7 | 6.6 | 1.011 (0.882–1.158) |
* significant differences between screen time ≤ 2 h and screen time > 2 h, the Pearson’s chi-square test; ** significant differences p < 0.001, the Wald test.
Nutritional behaviors of the individuals (n = 14,044) depending on screen time (ST) duration and the logistic regression analyses for the association of meeting ST recommendations (≤ 2 h) on nutritional behaviors (OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval).
| Factor | ST ≤ 2 h | ST > 2 h | OR for ST ≤ 2 h | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 63.7 | 57.1 | < 0.001 */0.06 | 1.197 (1.115–1.285) ** |
| Girls, | 55.9 | 44.9 | < 0.001 */0.08 | 1.253 (1.140–1.377) ** |
| Boys, | 44.1 | 55.1 | < 0.001 */0.07 | 1.247 (1.116–1.393) ** |
|
| 62.1 | 54.2 | < 0.001 */0.08 | 1.269 (1.183–1.363) ** |
| Girls | 60.2 | 52.3 | < 0.001 */0.06 | 1.133 (1.029–1.247) *** |
| Boys | 39.8 | 47.7 | < 0.001*/0.10 | 1.397 (1.256–1.554) ** |
|
| 50.1 | 45.7 | < 0.001 */0.04 | 1.073 (1.001–1.150) *** |
| Girls | 60.8 | 50.1 | < 0.001 */0.05 | 1.105 (1.005–1.213) *** |
| Boys | 39.2 | 50.0 | 0.009 */0.03 | 1.034 (0.932–1.148) |
|
| 61.3 | 59.7 | 0.047 */0.02 | 1.021 (0.952–1.096) |
| Girls | 54.9 | 45.1 | 0.052 | 1.041 (0.949–1.143) |
| Boys | 45.1 | 54.9 | 0.004 */0.03 | 1.102 (0.987–1.231) |
|
| 44.3 | 41.1 | 0.002 */0.03 | 1.078 (1.006–1.156) *** |
| Girls | 61.2 | 50.9 | 0.004 */0.03 | 1.056 (0.962–1.160) |
| Boys | 38.8 | 49.1 | 0.052 | 1.083 (0.975–1.202) |
|
| 52.7 | 48.1 | < 0.001 */0.04 | 1.162 (1.085–1.245) ** |
| Girls | 53.9 | 44.4 | < 0.001 */0.04 | 1.163 (1.060–1.277) *** |
| Boys | 46.1 | 55.5 | < 0.001 */0.07 | 1.275 (1.148–1.416) ** |
|
| 49.8 | 61.7 | < 0.001 */0.12 | 0.702 (0.653–0.754) ** |
| Girls | 52.0 | 44.4 | < 0.001 */0.10 | 0.729 (0.662–0.804) ** |
| Boys | 48.0 | 55.6 | < 0.001 */0.09 | 0.763 (0.684–0.852) ** |
|
| 38.6 | 47.5 | < 0.001 */0.09 | 0.773 (0.720–0.829) ** |
| Girls | 61.7 | 52.2 | < 0.001 */0.10 | 0.743 (0.676–0.818) ** |
| Boys | 38.3 | 47.8 | < 0.001*/0.08 | 0.754 (0.677–0.840) ** |
|
| 16.6 | 23.6 | < 0.001 */0.08 | 0.799 (0.730–0.875) ** |
| Girls | 52.6 | 43.9 | < 0.001 */0.08 | 0.824 (0.725–0.936) *** |
| Boys | 47.4 | 56.1 | < 0.001 */0.08 | 0.818 (0.718–0.932) *** |
* significant differences between screen time ≤ 2 h and screen time, the Pearson’s chi-square test; ** significant differences p < 0.001, the Wald test; *** significant differences p < 0.05, the Wald test.
Figure 1The results of the analysis of correspondence of nutritional behaviors and screen time duration in the total study group (n = 14,044). Beneficial behaviors are marked in green; unfavorable behaviors are marked in red.