4.5 Article

Parents report intrapersonal, interpersonal, and environmental barriers to supporting healthy eating and physical activity among their preschoolers

Publisher

NATL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA-N R C RESEARCH PRESS
DOI: 10.1139/H07-195

Keywords

preschool; childcare; nutrition; physical activity; barriers; social ecological model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is an increasing trend in childhood obesity in Canada and many preschool children are overweight or obese. The objective of this study was to explore parents' experiences and challenges in supporting healthy eating and physical activity among their preschool children. A qualitative descriptive study involving 5 focus groups was conducted. A convenience sample of 39 parents from 3 childcare centres in Hamilton, Ontario, participated. Parents were English speaking and had a child aged 2-5 years attending the childcare centre for at least 3 months. The research team read transcripts of the audio-taped sessions and used a constant comparison approach to develop themes, which involved coding comments by continually referring to previously coded comments for comparison. The social ecological model was used to organize the themes into 3 higher-level categories: (i) intrapersonal (individual): preschoolers' preferences and health; (ii) interpersonal (interactions): parents' and others' different views and practices, influence of the childcare centre, parents' lack of time, and family structure; and (iii) physical environment: accessibility of healthy foods, preschoolers with special needs, media influence, weather, lack of safety, and inaccessible resources. Parents perceived that there are various intrapersonal, interpersonal, and environmental barriers to supporting healthy eating and physical activity among their children. Program planners and health professionals can consider these barriers when developing interventions to promote healthy bodyweights among preschoolers.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available