4.6 Article

Higher Diet Quality in Adolescence and Dietary Improvements Are Related to Less Weight Gain During the Transition From Adolescence to Adulthood

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS
卷 178, 期 -, 页码 188-+

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.08.026

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01HL084064]
  2. National Institute on Aging [R01AG041200]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To examine the previously validated A Priori Diet Quality Score (APDQS), and weight change among adolescents transitioning into young adulthood. Study design Young people were recruited in middle/high schools and followed for 10 years. Participants reported diet and weight in 1999 (mean age, 15 years), 2004 (20 years), and 2009 (25 years). The analytic sample (n = 2656) had dietary intake assessments in 1999 and at least one other assessment. The APDQS (without alcoholic items) was based on 13 beneficial food groups, 12 adverse food groups, and 9 neutral food groups to capture aspects of Mediterranean/prudent diets, focusing on foods that are varied, based on nutritionally rich plants, and less processed. Results From mean age 15 to 25 years, mean (SD) weight increased from 61.0 (14.7) kg to 76.1 (18.8) kg, and APDQS increased from 43.1 (11.1) points to 45.6 (10.7) points. Within-person tracking correlation of the APDQS was 0.35 at mean age 15-20 years, increasing to 0.49 at 20-25 years. Independent of lifestyle factors and energy intake, a 15-point (IQR) higher APDQS in 1999 was associated with 1.5 kg (95% CI, 0.7-2.3 kg) less weight gain over 10 years, The increase in APDQS over time was similarly associated with less concurrent weight gain. Findings were stronger for models of excess weight gain. Conclusion Higher diet quality, based on an assessment of dietary patterns in and after adolescence, was associated with reduced weight gain during the next 10 years. Establishment of high-quality dietary patterns in adolescence may help mitigate excess weight gain by young adulthood.

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