IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i9p4625-d544191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patterns and Predictors of Sitting among Women from Disad-Vantaged Neighbourhoods over Time: A 5-Year Prospective Cohort Study

Author

Listed:
  • Minakshi Nayak

    (Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 23, Hobart, TAS 7000, Australia)

  • Karen Wills

    (Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 23, Hobart, TAS 7000, Australia)

  • Megan Teychenne

    (Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 23, Hobart, TAS 7000, Australia
    Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia)

  • Jo Salmon

    (Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia)

  • Verity Cleland

    (Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 23, Hobart, TAS 7000, Australia
    Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia)

Abstract

Background : Our aim was to describe patterns of sitting over time and determine the sociodemographic predictors of sitting over time among women living in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Methods: Women age between 18 and 45 years (mean = 34.4 ±8.1, n = 4349) reported their sitting time, sociodemographic (e.g., age), and health (e.g., body mass index) three times over 5 years. Linear mixed modelling was used to determine the predictors of change in sitting over time, adjusting for covariates. Results: Mean baseline sitting time was 40.9 h/week, decreasing to 40.1 h/week over five years. Greater sitting time was reported in participants ≤25 years of age, living with obesity, living in urban areas, self-reported poor/fair health, working full-time, with higher education, never married and with no children. Annually, the average sitting time decreased by 0.4 h/week (95% CI; −0.7 to −0.05) in women working full-time but increased by 0.1 h/week (95% CI; −0.2 to 0.6) who were not working. Similarly, annual sitting time decreased by 0.6 h/week (95% CI; −0.2 to 1.3) in women with no children but increased by 0.4 h/week (95% CI; −0.2 to 0.5) and 0.9 h/week (95% CI; 0.3 to 1.3) among those with two and three/more children, respectively. Conclusion: Among disadvantaged women, those not working and with two or more children may be at particular risk for increased sitting time and warrant further attention.

Suggested Citation

  • Minakshi Nayak & Karen Wills & Megan Teychenne & Jo Salmon & Verity Cleland, 2021. "Patterns and Predictors of Sitting among Women from Disad-Vantaged Neighbourhoods over Time: A 5-Year Prospective Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4625-:d:544191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4625/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4625/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lall, Ranjit, 2016. "How Multiple Imputation Makes a Difference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 414-433.
    2. Bronwyn K. Clark & Tracy L. Kolbe-Alexander & Mitch J. Duncan & Wendy Brown, 2017. "Sitting Time, Physical Activity and Sleep by Work Type and Pattern—The Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-15, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grace McKeon & Chiara Mastrogiovanni & Megan Teychenne & Simon Rosenbaum, 2022. "Barriers and Facilitators to Participating in an Exercise Referral Scheme among Women Living in a Low Socioeconomic Area in Australia: A Qualitative Investigation Using the COM-B and Theoretical Domai," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-13, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Julia C. Morse & Bridget Coggins, 2024. "Your silence speaks volumes: Weak states and strategic absence in the UN General Assembly," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 515-544, September.
    2. Kris‐Stella Trump, 2023. "Income inequality is unrelated to perceived inequality and support for redistribution," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(2), pages 180-188, March.
    3. Tobias Heinrich & Yoshiharu Kobayashi, 2022. "Evaluating explanations for poverty selectivity in foreign aid," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 30-47, February.
    4. Jennings, Will & Lewis-Beck, Michael & Wlezien, Christopher, 2020. "Election forecasting: Too far out?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 949-962.
    5. Vadim Ustyuzhanin, 2024. "Wealth and Rebellion: A Dualistic Perspective on Income Level and Revolutions," HSE Working papers WP BRP 92/PS/2024, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    6. Freese, Jeremy & Peterson, David, 2017. "Replication in Social Science," SocArXiv 5bck9, Center for Open Science.
    7. Håvard Hegre & Kristina Petrova & Nina von Uexkull, 2020. "Synergies and Trade-Offs in Reaching the Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    8. Lidewij R. Renaud & Maaike A. Huysmans & Hidde P. Van der Ploeg & Erwin M. Speklé & Allard J. Van der Beek, 2018. "Long-Term Access to Sit-Stand Workstations in a Large Office Population: User Profiles Reveal Differences in Sitting Time and Perceptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, September.
    9. Freire, Danilo & Uzonyi, Gary, 2018. "What Drives State-Sponsored Violence?: Evidence from Extreme Bounds Analysis and Ensemble Learning Models," SocArXiv pzx3q, Center for Open Science.
    10. Brown, Annette N. & Wood, Benjamin Douglas Kuflick, 2018. "Which tests not witch hunts: A diagnostic approach for conducting replication research," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 12, pages 1-26.
    11. Silvia Marchesi & Tania Masi, 2021. "Delegation of implementation in project aid," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 655-687, July.
    12. Gómez-Fernández, Nerea & Mediavilla, Mauro, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and academic performance: A multilevel analysis for Spain," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    13. Bernhard Reinsberg & Oliver Westerwinter, 2023. "Institutional Overlap in Global Governance and the Design of Intergovernmental Organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 693-724, October.
    14. Lauren L. Ferry & Alexandra O. Zeitz, 2024. "The power of having powerful friends: Evidence from a new dataset of IMF negotiating missions, 1985-2020," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 411-442, September.
    15. Albert Chiu & Xingchen Lan & Ziyi Liu & Yiqing Xu, 2023. "What To Do (and Not to Do) with Causal Panel Analysis under Parallel Trends: Lessons from A Large Reanalysis Study," Papers 2309.15983, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    16. Iemmi, Valentina, 2021. "Global collective action in mental health financing: Allocation of development assistance for mental health in 142 countries, 2000–2015," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).
    17. Bei Liu & Hong Chen & Xinru Huang, 2018. "Map Changes and Theme Evolution in Work Hours: A Co-Word Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-15, May.
    18. Zhong, Hua & Hu, Wuyang & Penn, Jerrod M., 2018. "Application of Multiple Imputation in Dealing with Missing Data in Agricultural Surveys: The Case of BMP Adoption," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(1), January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4625-:d:544191. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.