4.3 Article

Added sugar intake and metabolic syndrome in US adolescents: cross-sectional analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2012

Journal

PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION
Volume 19, Issue 13, Pages 2424-2434

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1368980016000057

Keywords

Metabolic syndrome; Adolescents; United States; Added sugar

Funding

  1. University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health
  2. UCSF School of Medicine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To examine the association between added sugar intake and metabolic syndrome among adolescents. Design Dietary, serum biomarker, anthropometric and physical activity data from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cycles between 2005 and 2012 were analysed using multivariate logistic regression models. Added sugar intake in grams per day was estimated from two 24 h standardized dietary recalls and then separated into quintiles from lowest to highest consumption. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were adjusted for physical activity, age, BMI Z-score and energy intake, and their interactions with race were included. Setting Nationally representative sample, USA. Subjects US adolescents aged 12-19 years (n 1623). Results Added sugar was significantly associated with metabolic syndrome. The adjusted prevalence odds ratios for having metabolic syndrome comparing adolescents in the third, fourth and fifth quintiles v. those in the lowest quintile of added sugar were 53 (95 % CI 14, 206), 99 (95 % CI 19, 509) and 87 (95 % CI 14, 549), respectively. Conclusions Our findings suggest that higher added sugar intake, independent of total energy intake, physical activity or BMI Z-score, is associated with increased prevalence of metabolic syndrome in US adolescents. Further studies are needed to determine if reducing intake of added sugar may help US adolescents prevent or reverse metabolic syndrome.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available