Griffiths Claire, Frearson Anna, Taylor Adam, Radley Duncan, Cooke Carlton
Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Metropolitan University, Fairfax Hall, Headingley Campus, Leeds, LS6 3QS, UK.
The Office of the Director of Public Health Technorth, 9 Harrogate Road, Chapel Allerton, LS7 3NB, UK.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2014 Dec 6;11:138. doi: 10.1186/s12966-014-0138-4.
Current UK policy in relation to the influence of the 'food environment' on childhood obesity appears to be driven largely on assumptions or speculations because empirical evidence is lacking and findings from studies are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to investigate the number of food outlets and the proximity of food outlets in the same sample of children, without solely focusing on fast food.
Cross sectional study over 3 years (n = 13,291 data aggregated). Body mass index (BMI) was calculated for each participant, overweight and obesity were defined as having a BMI >85(th) (sBMI 1.04) and 95(th) (sBMI 1.64) percentiles respectively (UK90 growth charts). Home and school neighbourhoods were defined as circular buffers with a 2 km Euclidean radius, centred on these locations. Commuting routes were calculated using the shortest straight line distance, with a 2 km buffer to capture varying routes. Data on food outlet locations was sourced from Leeds City Council covering the study area and mapped against postcode. Food outlets were categorised into three groups, supermarkets, takeaway and retail. Proximity to the nearest food outlet in the home and school environmental domain was also investigated. Age, gender, ethnicity and deprivation (IDACI) were included as covariates in all models.
There is no evidence of an association between the number of food outlets and childhood obesity in any of these environments; Home Q4 vs. Q1 OR = 1.11 (95% CI = 0.95-1.30); School Q4 vs. Q1 OR = 1.00 (95% CI 0.87 - 1.16); commute Q4 vs. Q1 OR = 0.1.00 (95% CI 0.83 - 1.20). Similarly there is no evidence of an association between the proximity to the nearest food outlet and childhood obesity in the home (OR = 0.77 [95% CI = 0.61 - 0.98]) or the school (OR = 1.01 [95% CI 0.84 - 1.23]) environment.
This study provides little support for the notion that exposure to food outlets in the home, school and commuting neighbourhoods increase the risk of obesity in children. It seems that the evidence is not well placed to support Governmental interventions/recommendations currently being proposed and that policy makers should approach policies designed to limit food outlets with caution.
英国当前关于“食物环境”对儿童肥胖影响的政策似乎很大程度上是基于假设或推测,因为缺乏实证证据且研究结果不一致。本研究的目的是调查同一组儿童样本中的食品销售点数量以及食品销售点的 proximity(此处未明确给出该词的准确意思,推测可能是“距离”之类),而不是仅关注快餐。
为期3年的横断面研究(汇总了n = 13291条数据)。为每位参与者计算体重指数(BMI),超重和肥胖分别定义为BMI大于第85百分位数(标准BMI 1.04)和第95百分位数(标准BMI 1.64)(英国90生长图表)。家庭和学校周边地区定义为以这些地点为中心、欧几里得半径为2公里的圆形缓冲区。通勤路线使用最短直线距离计算,并设置2公里的缓冲区以涵盖不同路线。食品销售点位置的数据来自利兹市议会,覆盖研究区域并根据邮政编码进行映射。食品销售点分为三类:超市、外卖店和零售店。还调查了在家庭和学校环境领域中距离最近的食品销售点的情况。年龄、性别、种族和贫困程度(IDACI)在所有模型中作为协变量纳入。
在任何这些环境中,均没有证据表明食品销售点数量与儿童肥胖之间存在关联;家庭环境中第四分位数与第一分位数相比,比值比(OR)= 1.11(95%置信区间 = 0.95 - 1.30);学校环境中第四分位数与第一分位数相比,OR = 1.00(95%置信区间0.87 - 1.16);通勤环境中第四分位数与第一分位数相比,OR = 1.00(95%置信区间0.83 - 1.20)。同样,在家庭(OR = 0.77 [95%置信区间 = 0.61 - 0.98])或学校(OR = 1.01 [95%置信区间0.84 - 1.23])环境中,也没有证据表明距离最近的食品销售点与儿童肥胖之间存在关联。
本研究几乎没有支持这样一种观点,即儿童在家庭、学校和通勤周边地区接触食品销售点会增加肥胖风险。似乎现有证据不足以支持目前政府提出的干预措施/建议,政策制定者在制定旨在限制食品销售点的政策时应谨慎行事。