4.1 Article

Predicting adolescents' intake of fruits and vegetables

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION EDUCATION AND BEHAVIOR
Volume 35, Issue 4, Pages 170-178

Publisher

B C DECKER INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60331-X

Keywords

adolescents; dietary intake; fruits and vegetables

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [5R01-CA71943-02] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To explore potential predictors of adolescents' fruit and vegetable intake by expanding on current theory and drawing from other adolescent research. Design: This research reports on baseline and interim data from a school-based intervention study. Data were collected through surveys administered to students at the beginning and end of their 7th grade year. Setting: The students attended 16 public schools in Minnesota. Participants: Data were collected on 3878 students; approximately half were female and 67% were white. All students in the 7th grade cohort were invited to participate in the surveys and over 94% completed both surveys. Variables Measured: Our dependent variable, fruit and vegetable intake, was assessed by a validated fruit and vegetable food frequency scale. Predictive factors assessed included parenting style, spirituality/religiosity, depressive symptoms, and other commonly assessed predictors. Analysis: Generalized linear mixed model regression Omnibus test of association using P < .05 is reported. Results: Subjective norms, barriers, knowledge, usual food choice, parenting style, spirituality/religiosity, and depressive symptoms were statistically significant predictors of intake. The model explained about 31% of the variance in fruit and vegetable consumption. Conclusions and Implications: To better understand adolescents' fruit and vegetable intake, we must explore novel predictors. Our results need to be replicated, and more exploratory research in this field is needed.

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