| Literature DB >> 35267976 |
Eveline Sarintohe1,2, Junilla K Larsen1, William J Burk1, Jacqueline M Vink1.
Abstract
(1) Background: Few studies have investigated (demographic) correlates of (prevalent) overweight rates among early adolescents, especially from higher socioeconomic positions (SEP) in developing countries, such as Indonesia. The current study aims to fill this gap. (2)Entities:
Keywords: Indonesia; adolescents; demographic; developing countries; high SEP; obesity; overweight; sex differences
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35267976 PMCID: PMC8912438 DOI: 10.3390/nu14051001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Chi-square analyses examining adolescent’s overweight status differences as a function of demographic and dieting characteristics.
| Not Overweight | Overweight | Chi Square | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % | |||
|
| ||||||
| Females | 146 | 46 | 24.0 | 24.0 | 23.57 | <0.001 |
| Males | 116 | 103 | 47.0 | 47.0 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Indonesian (Ethnicities) | 135 | 65.5 | 71 | 34.5 | 0.63 | 0.428 |
| Chinese Indonesian | 126 | 61.8 | 78 | 38.2 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Suburban | 117 | 69.6 | 51 | 30.4 | 4.27 | 0.039 |
| Urban | 145 | 59.7 | 98 | 40.3 | ||
|
| ||||||
| <500,000 | 166 | 64.1 | 93 | 35.9 | 0.04 | 0.849 |
| ≥500,000 | 96 | 63.2 | 56 | 36.8 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Never diet | 160 | 76.9 | 48 | 23.1 | 31.64 | <0.001 |
| Diet (1—more than 5 times) | 102 | 50.2 | 101 | 49.8 | ||
Logistic regression predicting overweight status by demographic and dieting correlates in the total group.
| B | SE | OR | CI 95% | Nagelkerke R2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 1.19 ** | 0.23 | 3.28 ** | 2.08–5.18 | |
| School area | 0.61 * | 0.27 | 1.84 * | 1.07–3.14 | |
| Ethnicity | −0.11 | 0.26 | 0.90 | 0.54–1.51 | 20.3 |
| Pocket money | 0.02 | 0.23 | 1.02 | 0.64–1.61 | |
| Past year dieting | 1.35 ** | 0.23 | 3.84 ** | 2.45–6.03 |
Note: * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01. Sex: 0 = females, 1 = males; school area: 0 = suburban, 1 = urban; ethnicity: 0 = Indonesian, 1 = Chinese Indonesian; pocket money: 0 = <500,000 Rp, 1 = >500,000 Rp; and past year dieting: 0 = no dieting, 1 = dieting. B: Beta; SE: Standard Error; OR: Odds Ratio; CI: Confidence Interval.
Logistic regression predicting overweight status by demographic and dieting correlates in the total group including interaction effects with sex.
| B | SE | OR | CI 95% | Nagelkerke R2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 1.19 ** | 0.23 | 3.28 ** | 2.08–5.18 | |
| School area | 0.61 * | 0.27 | 1.84 * | 1.07–3.14 | |
| Ethnicity | −0.11 | 0.26 | 0.90 | 0.54–1.51 | 20.3 |
| Pocket money | 0.02 | 0.23 | 1.02 | 0.64–1.61 | |
| Past year dieting | 1.35 ** | 0.23 | 3.84 ** | 2.45–6.03 | |
| Sex *school area | 0.98 * | 0.47 | 2.67 | 1.07–6.63 | 21.5 |
| Sex * pocket money | −0.61 | 0.47 | 0.54 | 0.21–1.38 | 20.7 |
| Sex * ethnicity | 0.87 | 0.46 | 2.39 | 0.97–5.90 | 21.3 |
| Sex * past year dieting | −0.46 | 0.49 | 0.63 | 0.24–1.66 | 20.5 |
Note: * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01. Two-way interactions were tested separately (one interaction per analyses added to the main model). Total model explained variance were reported per separately tested interaction. Sex: 0 = females, 1 = males; school area: 0 = suburban, 1 = urban; ethnicity: 0 = Indonesian ethnic, 1 = Chinese-Indonesian ethnic; pocket money: 0 = <500,000, 1 = >500,000; and past year dieting: 0 = never did diet, 1 = did diet. Sex-specific interactions (Sex X school area): girls = b = 0.01 (CI95% (−0.75, −0.78)); boys = b = 0.99 (CI95% (0.34–1.65)) using Model 1 PROCESS module for SPSS.