4.5 Article

Exploring racial differences in the obesity gender gap

Journal

ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 420-425

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.03.010

Keywords

Gender; Obesity; Race; Socioeconomic status; Health disparities

Funding

  1. Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [T32 HD007168, R24 HD050924]
  2. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health [K01CA172717]
  3. University Cancer Research Funds from Lineberger Cancer Center at UNC-Chapel Hill
  4. National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health [P60 MD000214-01]
  5. Pfizer
  6. Carolina Population Center [R24 HD050924]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To investigate whether the gender gap in obesity prevalence is greater among U.S. blacks than whites in a study designed to account for racial differences in socioeconomic and environmental conditions. Methods: We estimated age-adjusted, race-stratified gender gaps in obesity (% female obese % male obese, defined as body mass index >= 30 kg/m(2)) in the National Health Interview Survey 2003 and the Exploring Health Disparities in Integrated Communities Southwest Baltimore 2003 study (EHDIC-SWB). EHDIC-SWB is a population-based survey of 1381 adults living in two urban, low-income, racially integrated census tracts with no race difference in income. Results: In the National Health Interview Survey, the obesity gender gap was larger in blacks than whites as follows: 7.7 percentage points (ppts; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.4-11.9) in blacks versus -1.5 ppts (95% CI: -2.8 to -0.2) in whites. In EHDIC-SWB, the gender gap was similarly large for blacks and whites as follows: 15.3 ppts (95% Cl: 8.6-22.0) in blacks versus 14.0 ppts (95% CI: 7.1-20.9) in whites. Conclusions: In a racially integrated, low-income urban community, gender gaps in obesity prevalence were similar for blacks and whites. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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