4.5 Article

Effect of Breastfeeding on Childhood BMI and Obesity The China Family Panel Studies

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 93, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000055

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging [R01AG036042]
  2. Illinois Department of Public Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of breastfeeding on childhood obesity in China. We used data collected from the China Family Panel Studies, an ongoing, prospective, and nationwide longitudinal study to explore the extensive and dynamic social changes in China. A total of 7967 children were included in the analysis. Duration of breastfeeding was first treated as a continuous variable and subsequently dichotomized into ever versus never, >= 6 months versus < 6 months, >= 8 months versus < 8 months, and >= 12 months versus < 12 months. Multiple imputation was conducted and regressions with propensity score matching were performed. We also performed quantile regression to examine whether breastfeeding has an effect on childhood obesity among children with a specific quantile of body mass index (BMI). Consistent with findings from recent studies, in both adjusted and adjusted regressions, we did not find any statistically significant effect of breastfeeding on reducing the risk of obesity (unadjusted odds ratio, OR=1.02, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.99, 1.05, P=0.12; adjusted OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98, 1.05, P=0.36) or excessive weight (unadjusted OR=1.01, 95% CI 0.99, 1.03, P=0.26; adjusted OR=1.00, 95% CI 0.98, 1.02, P=0.90). Results were similar using various dichotomization of duration of breastfeeding. Quantile regression revealed that longer duration of breastfeeding is associated with higher BMI among children with small to medium quantile of BMI. Our findings echo recent research and caution against any population-wide strategy in attempting to reduce overweight and obesity through promotion of breastfeeding.

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

4.5
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