4.4 Article

Impact of Parental Socioeconomic Status on Childhood and Adolescent Overweight and Underweight in Korea

期刊

JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 24, 期 3, 页码 221-229

出版社

JAPAN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2188/jea.JE20130056

关键词

childhood and adolescent overweight and underweight; Korea; parental factors; risk factor; socioeconomic status

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The prevalence of overweight and underweight is steadily increasing among children and adolescents. To explore the relationship between parental socioeconomic status and body mass index, we examined levels of overweight and underweight among representative samples of children and adolescents in South Korea. Methods: We analyzed data from the 2009 Korean Survey on the Obesity of Youth and Children, conducted by the National Youth Policy Institute. The sample response rate for this survey was 93.9%. After excluding 745 subjects who had missing information on age, height, or weight, 9411 subjects were included. To measure parental socioeconomic status, 4 categories were assessed by using a structured questionnaire: subjective economic status, parental education level, parental occupational status, and family structure. We used the chi-squared test in univariable analysis and multinomial logistic regression in multivariable analysis. Results: Multinomial logistic regression analysis identified sex, education level, parental interest in weight management, and parental body shapes as statistically significant characteristics affecting overweight in children, and sex, place of residence, parental interest in weight management, and paternal and maternal body shapes as statistically significant characteristics affecting underweight (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Underweight and overweight coexist among adolescent Korean males of low socioeconomic status, which indicates that these conditions can coexist in developed countries. Appropriate interventions to address both overweight and underweight in adolescents are required.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据