IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0192584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do singles or couples live healthier lifestyles? Trends in Queensland between 2005-2014

Author

Listed:
  • Stephanie Schoeppe
  • Corneel Vandelanotte
  • Amanda L Rebar
  • Melanie Hayman
  • Mitch J Duncan
  • Stephanie J Alley

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the frequency of and trends in healthy lifestyle factors between singles and couples. Methods: Cross-sectional data from annual surveys conducted from 2005–2014 were used. The pooled sample included 15,001 Australian adults (mean age: 52.9 years, 50% male, 74% couples) who participated in the annual Queensland Social Survey via computer-assisted telephone interviews. Relationship status was dichotomised into single and couple. Binary logistic regression was used to assess associations between relationship status, and the frequency of and trends in healthy lifestyle factors. Results: Compared to singles, couples were significantly more likely to be a non-smoker (OR = 1.82), and meet recommendations for limited fast food (OR = 1.12), alcohol consumption (OR = 1.27) and fruit and vegetable intake (OR = 1.24). Fruit and vegetable intake was not significantly associated with relationship status after adjusting for the other healthy lifestyle factors. Conversely, couples were significantly less likely to be within a normal weight range (OR = 0.81). In both singles and couples, the trend data revealed significant declines in the rates of normal weight (singles: OR = 0.97, couples: OR = 0.97) and viewing TV for less than 14 hours per week (singles: OR = 0.85, couples: OR = 0.84), whilst non-smoking rates significantly increased (singles: OR = 1.12, couples: OR = 1.03). The BMI trend was no longer significant when adjusting for health behaviours. Further, in couples, rates of meeting recommendations for physical activity and fruit/vegetable consumption significantly decreased (OR = 0.97 and OR = 0.95, respectively), as did rates of eating no fast food (OR = 0.96). These trends were not significant when adjusting for the other healthy lifestyle factors. In singles, rates of meeting alcohol recommendations significantly increased (OR = 1.08). Conclusions: Health behaviour interventions are needed in both singles and couples, but relationship status needs to be considered in interventions targeting alcohol, fast food, smoking and BMI. Further research is needed to understand why health behaviours differ by relationship status in order to further improve interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephanie Schoeppe & Corneel Vandelanotte & Amanda L Rebar & Melanie Hayman & Mitch J Duncan & Stephanie J Alley, 2018. "Do singles or couples live healthier lifestyles? Trends in Queensland between 2005-2014," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-14, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0192584
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192584
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192584
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192584&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0192584?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0192584. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.