| Literature DB >> 34960008 |
Jialin Fu1, Fang Liang1, Yechuang Wang1, Nan Qiu1, Kai Ding1, Jing Zeng1, Justin Brian Moore2, Rui Li1,3.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the associations between perceived parental control, perceived parental modeling and parent-teen co-decision making, and fruit and vegetable (F&V) and sugar-sweetened beverage and junk food (S&J) consumption among Chinese adolescents, and examine whether self-efficacy mediates the associations. Data were collected in a cross-sectional survey of Chinese adolescents carried out in the fall of 2019. The questionnaires were adapted from the Family Life, Activity, Sun, Health, and Eating (FLASHE) Study. Ordinary least-squares regressions and a path analysis were performed to evaluate the hypothesized associations. The final sample included 3595 Chinese adolescents (mean (SD) age, 14.67 (1.73) years; 52.82% (n = 1899) males). Perceived parental control was positively associated with adolescents' F&V consumption, and was negatively associated with adolescents' S&J consumption. Perceived parental modeling and parent-teen co-decision making were both positively associated with adolescents' F&V consumption and negatively associated with their S&J consumption. Adolescents' self-efficacy was positively associated with F&V consumption and negatively associated with S&J consumption. These results suggest that serving as a positive role model, having adolescents participate in the decision-making process, and increasing adolescents' self-efficacy can be feasible and efficacious strategies to improve the nutritional quality of Chinese adolescents' diets.Entities:
Keywords: adolescent; food consumption; parental control; parental modeling; parent–teen co-decision making; self-efficacy
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34960008 PMCID: PMC8705551 DOI: 10.3390/nu13124454
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Flow chart of participants.
Baseline characteristic of participants.
| Characteristics 1 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 14.67 | 1.73 |
| Gender, | ||
| Male | 1899 | 52.82 |
| Female | 1696 | 47.18 |
| Adolescents’ educational level, | ||
| Junior high school | 1632 | 45.40 |
| Senior high school | 1963 | 54.60 |
| Parental education level, | ||
| Illiterate or primary school | 232 | 6.45 |
| Middle school or high school | 2414 | 67.15 |
| College or above | 949 | 26.40 |
| Monthly household income, RMB | ||
| ≤5000 | 461 | 12.82 |
| 5000–10,000 | 1641 | 45.65 |
| 10,000–20,000 | 865 | 24.06 |
| 20,000–40,000 | 360 | 10.01 |
| ≥40,000 | 268 | 7.46 |
| Perceived health status, | ||
| Excellent | 467 | 12.99 |
| Very good | 743 | 20.67 |
| Good | 1439 | 40.03 |
| Fair | 850 | 23.64 |
| Poor | 96 | 2.67 |
| Perceived weight status, | ||
| Very underweight | 146 | 4.06 |
| A little underweight | 511 | 14.21 |
| Just right | 1058 | 29.43 |
| A little overweight | 1458 | 40.56 |
| Very overweight | 422 | 11.74 |
| BMI | 21.12 | 4.65 |
| MVPA per week (minutes) | 751.05 | 187.41 |
1 Values are mean (SD), unless otherwise specified.
Descriptive and correlation matrix among parental influence, self-efficacy, and F&V or S&J consumption.
| Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1. Parental control F&V | 3.69 | 0.92 | 1 | ||||
| 2. Parental modeling F&V | 3.55 | 1.15 | 0.45 * | 1 | |||
| 3. Parent–teen co-decision making F&V | 3.13 | 1.23 | 0.57 * | 0.39 * | 1 | ||
| 4. Self-efficacy F&V | 3.65 | 1.16 | 0.22 * | 0.14 * | 0.15 * | 1 | |
| 5. Consumption F&V | 3.51 | 2.69 | 0.23 * | 0.15 * | 0.20 * | 0.32 * | 1 |
| Mean | SD | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| 6. Parental control S&J | 2.72 | 1.21 | 1 | ||||
| 7. Parental modeling S&J | 3.54 | 1.23 | 0.22 * | 1 | |||
| 8. Parent–teen co-decision making S&J | 3.28 | 1.02 | 0.34 * | 0.50 * | 1 | ||
| 9. Self-efficacy S&J | 3.45 | 1.22 | 0.48 * | 0.11 * | 0.15 * | 1 | |
| 10. Consumption S&J | 2.84 | 3.28 | 0.05 * | −0.10 * | −0.11 * | −0.24 * | 1 |
* p < 0.01. Note: SD = standard deviation.
Ordinary least-squares regression of adolescents’ fruit and vegetable or sugar-sweetened beverage and junk food consumption.
| Variable | b (SE) | 95% CI for b | |
| Parental control F&V | 0.28 (0.06) | 0.16–0.40 | <0.001 |
| Parental modeling F&V | 0.10 (0.04) | 0.01–0.18 | 0.024 |
| Parent–teen co-decision making F&V | 0.20 (0.05) | 0.11–0.28 | <0.001 |
| Variable | b (SE) | 95% CI for b | |
| Parental control S&J | 0.19 (0.05) | 0.10–0.29 | <0.001 |
| Parental modeling S&J | −0.12 (0.05) | −0.22–−0.01 | 0.026 |
| Parent–teen co-decision making S&J | −0.14 (0.07) | −0.28–−0.01 | 0.029 |
Note: adjusted for age, gender, adolescents’ educational level, parental education level, monthly house-hold income, perceived health status, perceived weight status, perceived peer influence, BMI, and physical activity; SE = standard error.
Figure 2Path model of adolescents’ fruit and vegetable (F&V) consumption, adjusted for adjusted for age, gender, adolescents’ educational level, parental education level, monthly house-hold income, perceived health status, perceived weight status, perceived peer influence, BMI, and physical activity. β-coefficient and 95% CI are in parentheses. Significant results are bolded. * p < 0.05.
Figure 3Path model of adolescents’ sugar-sweetened beverage and junk food (S&J) consumption, adjusted for adjusted for adjusted for age, gender, adolescents’ educational level, parental education level, monthly household income, perceived health status, perceived weight status, perceived peer influence, BMI, and physical activity. β-coefficient and 95% CI are in parentheses. Significant results are bolded. * p < 0.05.