4.7 Article

BMI trajectory groups in veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars

Journal

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 53, Issue 3, Pages 149-154

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.07.001

Keywords

Obesity; Overweight; OEF/OIF veterans; Trajectory modeling

Funding

  1. VA Health Services Research and Development [PPO 09 297 1]
  2. Yale Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center [P30AG21324]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. The study sought to determine BMI trajectories in Iraq/Afghanistan veterans over 6 years and to examine sociodemographic factors associated with BMI trajectory membership. Methods. Our study sample included 16,656 veterans post-deployment and entering the Veteran Healthcare Administration (VHA) healthcare system. We used national VHA administrative sociodemographic data, tracked veteran BMI for 6 years, and used trajectory modeling to identify BMI trajectories and sociodemographic characteristics associated with trajectory membership. Results. Five trajectory groups determined in the full sample were primarily differentiated by their post-deployment initial BMI: healthy (14.1%), overweight (36.3%), borderline obese (27.9%), obese (15.7%), and severely obese (6.0). Being female, younger, and white were associated with lower initial BMI trajectory group membership (p's<.05). Greater observed BMI increase was associated with higher initial BMI across groups (0.6, 0.8, 1.5, 1.9, 2.7). Gender specific trajectory models found that male Veterans with higher education and white female Veterans were associated with the lowest initial BMI group (p's<.05). Conclusions. Higher post-deployment BMI was associated with greater BMI gain over time for both male and female veterans. Older age is associated with higher BMI regardless of gender. Education level and racial status are differentially related to BMI trajectory by gender. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available