Built and social environments - Associations with adolescent overweight and activity
Built and social environments - Associations with adolescent overweight and activity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.026
复制
发表时间：
2006-08-01
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
Popkin, Barry M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nelson, Melissa C.;Gordon-Larsen, Penny;Popkin, Barry M.
背景：除了城市、农村、郊区的基本三分法之外，人们对社区特征的模式及其对体力活动(PA)和超重的影响知之甚少。方法：具有全国代表性的数据(国家青少年健康纵向研究。1994-1995年，共收集了20,745份)。体重、身高、PA和久坐行为是自我报告的。使用参与者居住社区的不同衡量标准(例如社会经济地位、犯罪、道路类型、街道连通性。宾夕法尼亚州娱乐设施)，聚类分析确定了具有相同社区特征的同质青少年群体。泊松回归预测精炼风险(RR)、体力活动(每周五次或更多次中等到剧烈的PA)和超重(身体质量指数等于或大于第95个百分位数)。结果：确定了六种强劲的社区模式：(1)农村工薪阶层：(2)郊区：(3)较新的郊区：(4)中上阶层，较老的郊区：(5)混血城市：(6)低社会经济地位(SES)的市中心地区。与居住在较新郊区的青少年相比，居住在农村工人阶级(调整后的RR[ARR]=138.95%可信区间[CI]=1.13-1.69)、郊区(ARR=1.3 0，CI=1.0 4-1.6 4)和混血城市(ARR=1.3 1，CI=1.0 5-1.6 4)社区的青少年更有可能超重，而不受个体社会经济地位、年龄和种族/民族的影响。居住在较老郊区的青少年比居住在较新郊区的青少年更有可能从事体育活动(ARR=1.11，CI=1.04~1.18)。与混血城市居民(ARR=1.09，CI=1.00-1.18)相比，居住在低SES市中心社区的人更有可能活跃起来，尽管不是很明显。结论：这些发现证明了特定的农村和城市环境与行为之间的不利关联，说明了社区对健康的重要影响以及整个美国评估居住景观的内在复杂性。简单的经典衡量标准掩盖了这些重要的复杂性。
Background: Little known about the patterning of neighborhood characteristics, beyond the basic urban rural, suburban trichotomy, and its impact on physical activity (PA) and overweight.Methods: Nationally representative data (National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. 1994-1995 n = 20,745) were collected. Weight, height, PA, and sedentary behavior were self-reported. Using diverse measures of the participants residential neighborhoods (e.g.. socioeconomic status, crime, road type, street connectivity. PA recreation facilities), cluster analyses identified homogeneous groups of adolescents sharing neighborhood characteristics. Poisson regression predicted refine risk (RR) a being physically active (five or more bouts/week of moderate to vigorous PA) and overweight (body mass index equal or greater than the 95th percentile. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Center for Health Statistics growth curves).Results: Six robust neighborhood patterns were identified (1) rural working class: (2) exurban: (3) newer suburban: (4) upper-middle class, older suburban: (5) mixed-race urban: and (6) low-socioeconomic-status (SES) inner-city areas. Compared to adolescents living in newer suburbs, those in rural working-class (adjusted RR[ARR] = 138.95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13-1.69), exurban (ARR = 1.30, CI = 1.04-1.64), and mixed-race urban (ARR = 1.31, CI =1.05-1.64) neighborhoods were more likely to be overweight, independent of individual SES, age, and race/ethnicity. Adolescents living in older suburban areas were more likely to be physically active than residents of newer suburbs (ARR = 1.11, CI = 1.04-1.18). Those living in low-SES inner-city neighborhoods were more likely to be active, though not significantly so, compared to mixed-race urban residents (ARR = 1.09, CI = 1.00-1.18).Conclusions: These findings demonstrate disadvantageous associations between specific rural and urban environments and behavior, illustrating important effects of the neighborhood on health and the inherent complexity of assessing residential landscapes across the United States. Simple classical measures mask these important complexities.