4.1 Article

Weight Perception and Dietary Intake among Chinese Youth, 2004-2009

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE
Volume 21, Issue 4, Pages 691-699

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12529-013-9332-z

Keywords

Weight perception; Dietary intake; Children; Adolescents; China

Funding

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R01-HD30880, R01-HD38700] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK056350] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Little is known on the extent of weight misperception and its relation with dietary intake among Chinese youth. The study aimed to investigate extent and correlates of weight misperception and its relation with dietary intake among Chinese youth. Data pertaining to Chinese youth, 6-17 years of age, from the 2004-2009 China Health and Nutrition Survey (N = 3,923) were analyzed using STATA version 12.1. The heights and weights of the participants were measured by well-trained health workers at the participants' homes or a local clinic following the reference protocol recommended by the World Health Organization. The dietary intake data of the participants were collected on three consecutive days at both the household and individual levels. Of the children 6-11 years of age, 18.9 % were underweight and 15.3 % were overweight. Among the children 12-17 years of age, 18.3 % were underweight and 8.1 % were overweight. Less than 60 % of Chinese youth accurately estimated their weight status. Nutrition knowledge was positively related to a perception of being overweight (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.98, p = .007) among children 12-17 years of age. A perception of being overweight was positively associated with fat and protein intake among children 6-11 years of age (p < .05). A discrepancy exists between the actual and perceived weight status of Chinese youth. Efforts are needed in China to promote accurate weight perception, healthy weight, and eating behaviors.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available