3.8 Article

Sedentary behavior, physical activity, and the metabolic syndrome among US adults

期刊

OBESITY RESEARCH
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 608-614

出版社

NORTH AMER ASSOC STUDY OBESITY
DOI: 10.1038/oby.2005.65

关键词

exertion; metabolic syndrome X; nutrition surveys; risk factors; television

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: We examined the associations among physical activity, sedentary behavior, and metabolic syndrome in a representative sample of U.S. adults. Research Methods and Procedures: A total of 1626 men and women >= 20 years old from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999 to 2000 who attended the morning examination were evaluated. The metabolic syndrome was defined by using the definition from the National Cholesterol Education Program. Results: In unadjusted analysis, participants who did not engage in any moderate or vigorous physical activity during leisure time had almost twice the odds of having metabolic syndrome [odds ratio (OR), 1.90; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22 to 2.97] as those who reportedly engaged in >= 150 min/wk of such activity. Adjustment for age, sex, race or ethnicity, educational status, smoking status, and alcohol use attenuated the OR (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 0.87 to 2.45). Compared with participants who watched television or videos or used a computer < 1 h/d outside of work, the adjusted ORs for having metabolic syndrome were 1.41 (95% CI 0.80 to 2.51) for 1 h/d, 1.37 (95% CI 0.85 to 2.20) for 2 h/d, 1.70 (95% CI 0.92 to 3.14) for 3 h/d, and 2.10 (95% CI 1.27 to 3.47) for >= 4 h/d. Additional adjustment for physical activity or sedentary behavior minimally affected the ORs. Discussion: Sedentary behavior is an important potential determinant of the prevalence of the syndrome. Efforts to lessen the amount of time that U.S. adults spend watching television or videos or using a computer, especially if coupled to increases in physical activity, could result in substantial decreases in the prevalence of metabolic syndrome.

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

3.8
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