| Literature DB >> 35270754 |
David Manzano-Sánchez1, María Victoria Palop-Montoro2, Milagros Arteaga-Checa3, Alfonso Valero-Valenzuela1.
Abstract
The main objective of this research article was to make a cluster analysis in Compulsory Secondary Education students with regard to their physical activity levels, their relationship with nutritional habits and body perception. In this study, a total of 1089 students participated, to whom a battery of tests was given in order to assess three aspects: levels of physical activity, food consumption habits and perception of body image. The main results indicated that the adolescent sample presented high levels of physical activity in comparison with other studies. In addition, a profile analysis was carried out, showing that there were no differences in physical activity, in nutritional habits or in body-image index. Taking into account gender, women who practice light physical activity had better nutritional habits. On the other hand, boys dominated in the group of moderate-to-high physical activity, while the girls were mainly included in the profile of low physical activity. Finally, body-image index was greater in men than women. It was concluded that is necessary to promote the importance of adequate nutritional habits in addition to physical activity, and it is necessary to promote body image, particularly among adolescent girls, given their low values of physical activity and worse body-image perception in relation to boys.Entities:
Keywords: adolescents; body perception; nutrition; physical education; physical exercise
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35270754 PMCID: PMC8910452 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19053064
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Sample selection process.
Figure 2Research process.
Descriptive and correlation values.
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fruit consumption | 1–7 | 4.53 | 1.86 | −0.167 | −1.143 | 0.505 ** | −0.048 | −0.042 | 0.351 ** | 0.310 ** | 0.006 | 0.327 ** | −0.002 | 0.111 ** | 0.106 ** | 0.105 ** | 0.080 ** |
| 2 | Vegetables and greens consumption | 1–7 | 4.57 | 1.83 | −0.200 | −1.050 | - | −0.019 | −0.001 | 0.230 ** | 0.299 ** | −0.025 | 0.338 ** | −0.052 | 0.080 ** | 0.010 | 0.052 | 0.072 * |
| 3 | Sugary drinks consumption | 1–7 | 2.72 | 1.80 | 0.991 | −0.035 | - | 0.421 ** | 0.208 ** | 0.109 ** | 0.485 ** | 0.081 ** | 0.312 ** | 0.090 ** | −0.017 | 0.009 | −0.026 | |
| 4 | Sweets and candies consumption | 1–7 | 2.95 | 1.62 | 0.809 | −0.118 | - | 0.100 ** | 0.098 ** | 0.530 ** | 0.003 | 0.316 ** | 0.097 ** | −0.075 * | −0.039 | −0.068 * | ||
| 5 | Natural juice consumption | 1–7 | 3.66 | 1.97 | 0.264 | −1.147 | - | −0.401 ** | 0.209 ** | 0.305 ** | 0.151 ** | 0.156 ** | 0.088 ** | 0.077 * | 0.072 * | |||
| 6 | Dried fruit consumption | 1–7 | 3.45 | 1.87 | 0.434 | −0.953 | - | 0.238 ** | 0.327 ** | 0.143 ** | 0.129 ** | 0.071 * | 0.106 * | 0.084 ** | ||||
| 7 | French fries consumption | 1–7 | 2.198 | 1.63 | 0.825 | −0.080 | - | 0.136 ** | 0.510 ** | 0.145 ** | −0.063 ** | −0.050 | −0.013 | |||||
| 8 | Fish consumption | 1–7 | 3.33 | 1.66 | 0.342 | −0.684 | - | 0.278 ** | 0.137 ** | 0.040 | 0.091 ** | 0.043 | ||||||
| 9 | Hamburgers/hot dogs consumption | 1–7 | 2.91 | 1.46 | 0.722 | 0.070 | - | 0.109 ** | −0.013 | 0.054 | −0.014 | |||||||
| 10 | Body-image index | 1–5 | 2.51 | 0.55 | −0.861 | 0.208 | - | 0.128 ** | 0.010 | 0.016 | ||||||||
| 11 | Intense PA minutes per day | - | 45.36 | 41.44 | 0.737 | 0.014 | - | 0.295 ** | 0.092 ** | |||||||||
| 12 | Moderate PA minutes per day | - | 34.64 | 35.00 | 1.212 | 1.751 | - | 0.085 ** | ||||||||||
| 13 | Walking minutes per day | - | 68.12 | 48.94 | 0.735 | 0.110 | - |
Note: R = Range; M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; A = Asymmetry; K = Kurtossis; PA = Physical Activity; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.001.
Figure 3Physical activity levels in students. Note: PA = Physical Activity.
Differences in physical activity minutes from cluster analysis.
| Cluster | Cluster | Cluster | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Intense PA minutes per day | 91.40 | 32.32 | 43.75 | 35.48 | 18.27 | 21.31 | <0.001 | 0.495 | 531.898 |
| Moderate PA minutes per day | 52.86 | 38.98 | 36.41 | 33.41 | 22.01 | 27.72 | <0.001 | 0.125 | 77.226 |
| Walking minutes per day | 47.63 | 25.78 | 126.71 | 30.47 | 34.57 | 22.93 | <0.001 | 0.711 | 1336.048 |
Note: M = Mean; SD = Standard Deviation; F = MANOVA effect value; eTa = Partial eta squared; PA = Physical Activity; Traza de Pillai = 1.229; (F = 575.996); p < 0.001.
Univariate analysis for gender and factor interaction.
| Gender | Profiles | Gender × Profiles | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Fruit consumption | 1.21 | 0.27 | 1.91 | 0.15 | 4.07 * | 0.02 |
| Vegetables and greens consumption | 11.61 ** | 0.01 | 0.74 | 0.48 | 5.32 ** | 0.01 |
| Sugary drinks consumption | 1.72 | 0.19 | 0.59 | 0.56 | 0.02 | 0.98 |
| Sweets and candies consumption | 11.31 ** | 0.01 | 0.79 | 0.46 | 0.66 | 0.52 |
| Natural juice consumption | 1.23 | 0.27 | 2.01 | 0.14 | 3.16 * | 0.04 |
| Dried fruit consumption | 2.35 | 0.13 | 2.66 | 0.07 | 7.72 ** | 0.01 |
| French fries consumption | 0.92 | 0.38 | 0.93 | 0.40 | 2.19 | 0.11 |
| Fish consumption | 0.45 | 0.50 | 2.38 | 0.09 | 1.78 | 0.17 |
| Hamburgers/hot dogs consumption | 1.56 | 0.21 | 0.43 | 0.65 | 0.99 | 0.37 |
| Body image index | 32.596 ** | 0.01 | 1.09 | 0.34 | 0.31 | 0.65 |
Note: M = Mean, SD = Standard Deviation; F = MANOVA effect value; * = p < 0.05; ** = p < 0.01.
Comparisons for gender according to the physical activity profile.
| Male vs. | Male vs. | Male vs. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fruit consumption | 0.215 | −0.559 * | −0.046 |
| Vegetables and greens consumption | −0.416 * | −0.868 ** | 0.099 |
| Sweets and candies consumption | −0.323 * | −0.208 | −0.510 ** |
| Natural juice consumption | 0.225 | −0.504 * | −0.140 |
| Dried fruit consumption | 0.251 | −0.797 ** | 0.001 |
Note: 1 = Low physical activity; 2 = Moderate and high physical activity; 3 = Light physical activity; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Multiple comparisons for physical activity profile by gender.
| 1 vs. 2 | 1 vs. 3 | 3 vs. 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fruit consumption | Male | 0.210 | −0.145 | 0.355 |
| Female | −0.564 * | −0.406 | −0.158 | |
| Vegetables and greens consumption | Male | 0.064 | −0.321 | 0.385 |
| Female | −0.388 * | 0.194 | −0.582 * | |
| Natural juice consumption | Male | 0.214 | −0.127 | 0.342 |
| Female | −0.515 * | −0.493 | −0.022 | |
| Dried fruit consumption | Male | 0.289 | −0.186 | 0.476 |
| Female | −0.759 ** | −0.437 | −0.322 |
Note: 1 = Low physical activity; 2 = Light physical activity, 3 = Moderate and high physical activity; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Differences in physical activity profiles by gender.
| Cluster | Cluster | Cluster | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % |
| % | ||
|
| Men | 169 | 60.4 | 137 | 38.4 | 147 | 27.1 |
| Women | 111 | 39.6 | 220 | 61.6 | 305 | 72.9 | |
|
| 0.231 | ||||||
| Chi2 | 57.707 *** | ||||||
Note: n = Size of the sample; eTa = Partial eta squared; *** p < 0.001.