4.7 Article

Relationship Between Trajectories of Trunk Fat Mass Development in Adolescence and Cardiometabolic Risk in Young Adulthood

Journal

OBESITY
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 1699-1706

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1038/oby.2010.340

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Community and Population Health Research (CPHR) scholarship
  2. Canadian National Health and Research Development Program (NHRDP)
  3. Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR)
  4. Saskatchewan Health Research Foundation (SHRF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To examine developmental trajectories of trunk fat mass (FM) growth of individuals categorized as either low or high for cardiometabolic risk at 26 years, a total of 55 males and 76 females from the Saskatchewan Pediatric Bone Mineral Accrual Study (1991-2007) were assessed from adolescence (11.5 +/- 1.8 years) to young adulthood (26.2 +/- 2.2 years) (median of 11 visits per individual) and had a measure of cardiometabolic risk in young adulthood. Participants were categorized as low or high for blood pressure and cardiometabolic risk as adults using a sex-specific median split of continuous standardized risk scores. Individual trunk FM trajectories of participants in each risk group were analyzed using multilevel random effects models. Males and females in the high blood pressure group had significantly steeper (accelerated) trajectories of trunk FM development (0.61 +/- 0.14 and 0.52 +/- 0.10 log g, respectively) than those in the low blood pressure group for females in the high cardiometabolic risk group trajectory of trunk FM was significantly steeper (0.52 +/- 0.10 log g) than those females in the low cardiometabolic risk group. Dietary fat was positively related (0.01 +/- 0.003 g/1,000 kcal) and physical activity negatively related (-0.16 +/- 0.05 physical activity score) to trunk FM development in males. Young adults with high cardiometabolic risk, compared to low, have greater trunk FM as early as 8 years of age, which supports the need for early intervention.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available