4.6 Article

Factors associated with physical activity among African-American men and women

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 340-346

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.11.007

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. PHS HHS [CCR421476-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: African Americans have lower rates of physical activity (PA) than Caucasians. Although correlates of PA have been Studied in many populations, little is known about the influences on physical activity for African Americans, particularly African-American men. Methods: Individuals were randomly selected from 20 church rosters and participated in a telephone survey (165 men, 407 women) in May to September 2003. Participants were classified according to whether they were meeting recommendations for moderate to vigorous physical activity, walking, and strength training. Sociodemographic, health, psychosocial, and physical environment correlates were also assessed. Mixed-model logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results: For men, explained variance ranged from 20.8% to 33.3%. For women, the independent variables explained 10.8% to 23.2% of the variance in physical activity behavior. Significant positive correlates among men were employment, income, self-rating of health, PA self-efficacy, and PA enjoyment, and fruit and vegetable intake, with age as a negative correlate. Significant positive correlates among women were employment, education, income, self-rating of health, PA self-efficacy, PA enjoyment, fruit and vegetable intake, reporting PA programs at their Church, and attempting weight loss. Negative correlates included age, number of chronic health conditions, and body mass index. Conclusions: Various factors influenced PA in men and women, suggesting a need for gender targeting in addition to cultural adaptations in PA interventions for African Americans.

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