4.4 Article

Impact of Caregiver Type for 3-Year-Old Children on Subsequent Between-Meal Eating Habits and Being Overweight From Childhood to Adulthood: A 20-Year Follow-up of the Ibaraki Children's Cohort (IBACHIL) Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 25, 期 9, 页码 600-607

出版社

JAPAN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2188/jea.JE20140078

关键词

children; eating habits; overweight; cohort study; epidemiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Because of the increasing number of mothers who continue to work after childbirth, participation in childcare has diversified. However, the impact of the main caregiver on children's habits has not been determined. We sought to examine the effect of caregiver differences on childhood habituation of between-meal eating and body mass index (BMI). Methods: The Ibaraki Children's Cohort Study involved 4592 Japanese children whose parents answered health questionnaires at age 3. Follow-up questionnaires were distributed to parents when children were 6 and 12 years old and to study subjects directly when they were 22 years old. We compared prevalence of between-meal eating and overweight as well as mean BMI at ages 6, 12, and 22 years, by their main daytime caregiver at age 3. Results: Compared to children cared for by mothers, those cared for by grandparents had a higher prevalence of between-meal eating before dinner for boys and girls at ages 6 and 12 years. At age 22 years, boys cared for by grandparents had a higher prevalence of overweight than those cared for by mothers (18.5% versus 11.2%, P = 0.037), but no such difference was noted in girls. However, both boys and girls cared for by grandparents had higher mean BMI over time than those cared for by mothers (coefficient = 0.47 kg/m(2) for boys and coefficient = 0.35 kg/m(2) for girls). Conclusions: Being cared for by grandparents at age 3 was associated with subsequent between-meal eating habits, being overweight, and increased mean BMI from childhood to 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

4.4
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