4.6 Article

Prevalence and sociodemographic factors associated with meeting the 24-hour movement guidelines in a sample of Brazilian adolescents

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 15, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239833

关键词

-

资金

  1. Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development [406258/2018-0]
  2. Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel
  3. Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The present cross-sectional study aimed to determine the proportion of adolescents meeting the 24-hour movement guidelines, and investigate sociodemographic factors associated with meeting them. Methods Self-reported (average daily volume of MVPA, sleep duration, and time watching videos and playing videogames) and accelerometer-measured (MVPA and sleep duration) 24-hour movement behaviors were classified according to recommendations, and sex, age, socioeconomic status (SES), family structure, parental education, and number of people in the household were tested as correlates of meeting recommendations using multilevel logistic regressions. Results The proportion of adolescents (n = 867, mean age: 16.4 years, 50.3% girls) meeting the MVPA, ST, and sleep duration guidelines was of 25%, 28%, and 41%, respectively, for self-reported data. From accelerometer data (n = 688), 7.1% met MVPA and 31.7% met sleep duration recommendations. Adherence to all three recommendations was 3% with self-report and 0.2% with accelerometer data. Boys were more likely to meet MVPA, but not ST and sleep-duration recommendations. A positive relationship was observed between age and meeting the ST recommendation. Conclusions Adherence to the sleep duration recommendation was higher than to the screen-time and MVPA recommendations and few in this sample of Brazilian adolescents achieved the 24-hour guidelines. Efforts are needed to improve 24-hour movement behaviors.

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

4.6
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