School-based obesity prevention programs: An evidence-based review
School-based obesity prevention programs: An evidence-based review
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/oby.2008.29
复制
发表时间：
2008-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Jensen, Gordon L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kropski, Jonathan A.;Keckley, Paul H.;Jensen, Gordon L.
目的：本综述旨在检验学校项目减少儿童超重或肥胖的有效性。方法和程序：对 1990 年以来发表的研究文献进行系统回顾，以确定实验性或准实验性学校课程或环境预防干预措施，并在基线后 6 个月以上进行评估，以超重衡量标准报告结果。结果：确定了 14 项研究，其中一项涉及纯营养项目，两项涉及体育活动促进干预措施，另外 11 项研究涉及纯营养项目、两项体育活动促进干预措施和 11 项研究。结合营养和身体活动成分的研究。大多数研究 (n = 10) 提供的证据质量较弱（2 级）。一项研究提供了强有力的（4 级）证据，仅降低了女孩超重的比值比，而四项 2 级研究报告了男孩、女孩或两者的体重指数或超重风险或超重患病率的显着改善。十二项研究报告称，至少一项饮食摄入量、体力活动和/或久坐行为的指标有显着改善。 讨论：由于已发表的研究数量较少和方法论方面的问题，我们对基于学校的肥胖预防计划的功效得出强有力的结论的能力受到限制。定性分析表明，以社会学习为基础的计划可能更适合女孩，而促进体育活动的结构和环境干预措施可能对男孩更有效。高质量的评估协议应被视为未来计划的重要组成部分。
Objective: This review seeks to examine the effectiveness of school-based programs for reducing childhood overweight or obesity.Methods and Procedures: A systematic review of the research literature published since 1990 was conducted to identify experimental or quasi-experimental school-based curricular or environmental preventive interventions, with evaluation >= 6 months after baseline, which reported outcomes in terms of a measure of overweight.Results: Fourteen studies were identified, including one involving a nutrition-only program, two physical activity promotion interventions and eleven studies combining nutrition and physical activity components. Most studies (n = 10) offered weak (grade 2) quality evidence. One study offered strong (grade 4) evidence reducing the odds ratio for overweight in girls only, while four grade 2 studies reported significant improvements in BMI or at-risk-for overweight or overweight prevalence in boys, girls, or both. Twelve studies reported significant improvement in at least one measure of dietary intake, physical activity, and/or sedentary behavior.Discussion: Our ability to draw strong conclusions as to the efficacy of school-based obesity prevention programs is limited by the small number of published studies and by methodological concerns. Qualitative analysis suggests programs grounded in social learning may be more appropriate for girls, while structural and environmental interventions enabling physical activity may be more effective for boys. High-quality evaluation protocols should be considered essential components of future programs.