4.3 Article

Impact of Snacking Pattern on Overweight and Obesity Risk in a Cohort of 11- to 13-Year-Old Adolescents

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000000453

Keywords

adolescents; exercise; overweight; snacks

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The association between snacking habits and overweight in adolescents is unclear. We evaluated the relation between snacking patterns and overweight/obesity in a cohort of 11- to 13-year-old Italian adolescents. Methods: The dietary habits of 400 randomly selected adolescents were evaluated; those with body mass index >= 85th percentile were considered as overweight/obese. Participants were classified based on the percentage of caloric intake from snacks (<15%, 15%-20%, >20%), snacking frequency (1, 2, >= 3), and timing of consuming the most caloric snack (morning, afternoon, evening). Results: A minority of participants (13/400, 3.3%) did not consume any snacks; 5/13 (38.5) of them were overweight/obese. Among snackers (387/400), overweight/obesity prevalence was 10.4%, 14.4%, 20.5%, respectively, in those consuming <15%, 15% to 10%, and >20% of their energy intake from snacks. In a Poisson regression model, the overweight/obesity relative rigks (RRs) were 1.35 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-3.15) and 2.32 (1.10-4.89) for 15% to 20% and >20% calories/day from snacks, respectively. Overweight/obesity prevalence (from 9.6% to 22.6%) was correlated with snacking frequency (RR 2.20, 95% CI 0.92-5.27, and RR 4.17, 95% CI 1.60-10.9, for 2 and >= 3 snacks per day, respectively). The most caloric snacks were consumed in the morning (180/387) and afternoon (179/387); 28.6% of the predominantly evening snackers (28/387) were overweight/obese (RR 3.12, 95% CI 1.17-8.34). Conclusions: Increased snacking calories, frequency, and evening snacking are independently associated with overweight/obesity in Italian middleschool adolescents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available