4.6 Article

Physical Activity and Television Watching in Relation to Risk of Type 2 Diabetes

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 169, Issue 4, Pages 428-434

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn344

Keywords

African continental ancestry group; diabetes mellitus; type 2; exercise; incidence; motor activity; television; walking; women's health

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [CA58420]
  2. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [1R01DK068738]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Few modifiable risk factors for type 2 diabetes have been documented in the high-risk population of US black women. The authors used data from 45,668 black women aged 21-69 years, followed biennially from 1995 to 2005 in the Black Women's Health Study, to estimate incidence rate ratios for type 2 diabetes comparing various levels of physical activity and television watching. Cox proportional hazards models were used to control confounding factors. During 10 years of follow-up, 2,928 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were identified. Vigorous activity was inversely associated with type 2 diabetes risk (P-trend < 0.0001); the incidence rate ratio for >= 7 hours per week was 0.43 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.31, 0.59) relative to no activity. Brisk walking for >= 5 hours per week was associated with reduced type 2 diabetes risk (incidence rate ratio = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.92) relative to no walking. Television watching was associated with an increased type 2 diabetes risk: The incidence rate ratio was 1.86 (95% CI: 1.54, 2.24) for >= 5 hours relative to < 1 hour of television per day, independent of physical activity. These observational data suggest that black women might reduce their risk of developing type 2 diabetes by increasing their time spent walking or engaged in vigorous physical activity and by limiting television watching.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available