4.5 Article

Child overweight in France and its relationship with physical activity, sedentary behaviour and socioeconomic status

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 61, 期 4, 页码 509-516

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602538

关键词

child obesity; France; physical activity; sedentary behaviour; socioeconomic status; energy intake

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: (1) To assess the prevalence of childhood overweight (OW) and obesity in France; (2) to examine how physical activity and sedentary behaviour are involved in the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and OW, while taking into account total energy intake. Design and subjects: Representative sample of French children aged 3-14 years (n=1016) taken from the 1998-1999 cross-sectional French INCA (Enquete Individuelle et Nationale sur les Consommations Alimentaires) food consumption survey. Measurements: Weight and height, leisure-time physical activity (LTPA), sedentary behaviour (TV viewing and video-game use), and SES were reported by parents or children by answering questionnaires; total energy intake was assessed using a 7-day food record. Results: In total, 15.2% (95% CI: 13.0-17.6) of the children are OW (including obese), according to the IOTF (International Obesity Task Force) definition. OW is inversely associated with SES in children over 6 years of age. LTPA is negatively correlated to OW among the 3 to 5-year-old children only, whereas sedentary behaviour is positively related to OW in childhood and adolescence. From 6 years old on, SES is inversely associated with sedentary behaviour, which consequently may partly mediate the relationship between SES and OW. Conclusion: This study confirms the association between SES, sedentary behaviour and childhood OW in France. It was performed before the launching of the French Program of Nutrition and Health (PNNS) in 2001 and will be repeated in 2006. This will contribute to monitoring both childhood OW and its main determinants at the population scale.

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

4.5
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