Do the effects of interventions aimed at the prevention of childhood obesity reduce inequities? A re-analysis of randomized trial data from two Cochrane reviews

Author:

Palmer Jennifer CORCID,Davies Annabel L,Spiga Francesca,Heitmann Berit L,Jago Russell,Summerbell Carolyn D,Higgins Julian PT,

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundPublic health attempts to prevent obesity in children and young people should aim to minimize health inequalities. We aimed to assess whether there were differences in the effectiveness of the interventions included in two Cochrane reviews according to the eight PROGRESS inequity factors.MethodsWe collected data on change in BMI (standardized or unstandardized), subgrouped by baseline measures of PROGRESS factors, for intervention and control groups, from trial authors. We calculated the intervention effect per subgroup (mean difference), then contrasted these to estimate interactions between intervention and the baseline factors. We combined interaction estimates for each factor across trials using standard procedures for meta-analysis.FindingsOur analysis of interventions from 81 trials found no substantial differences in effectiveness for different subgroups in most scenarios. However, in the younger age group (5-11 years), the effect of interventions on standardized BMI appeared to be higher in boys.InterpretationThe Cochrane reviews found that interventions promoting physical activity (only) have a beneficial effect on BMI (compared with a control group) for children and young people aged 5-18 years, as well as interventions promoting physical activity alongside healthy eating for 5-11 year olds. Although these beneficial effects were small, when delivered at scale, they may have the potential to contribute meaningfully to reducing the prevalence of childhood obesity. Our findings suggest that those responsible for public health can promote these beneficial interventions without major concerns about increasing inequalities. Because many of the interventions studied, including school-based interventions, provide building blocks of ‘whole systems approaches’, the findings are relevant to policy and practice.FundingNational Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).Research in contextEvidence before this studyA core principle of any public health guidance is to minimize health inequalities. Two previous studies of the effects of interventions aiming to prevent obesity in children and young people, by promoting physical activity or a healthy diet, found that such interventions do not increase health inequalities. However, these studies used secondary data published in trial reports, limiting the data available for analysis. Two recent Cochrane systematic reviews and meta-analyses of over 200 randomized trials of interventions to prevent obesity in children and young people, found,on average, small beneficial effects of physical activity interventions in 5-18 year olds on (standardized and unstandardized) BMI and of combined physical activity and dietary interventions in 5-11 year olds. A previous modelling study found that small beneficial benefits such as these, when delivered at scale, have the potential to contribute meaningfully to reducing the prevalence of childhood obesity. However, average effects may mask differential effects on health equity. Our objective was to collect primary trial results (not previously reported) to examine whether effects of interventions vary according to factors related to inequity as represented by the PROGRESS acronym: place, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender/sex, religion, education, socio-economic status, and social capital.Added value of this studyTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first large-scale meta-analysis to assess the impact of interventions to prevent obesity in children and young people on health equity using primary data from randomized trials. Data from 81 trials were included, collected directly from the trialists as aggregate data by intervention and by subgroup, and combined in meta-analyses. We found no substantial impact of the interventions on inequalities, although in the younger age group (5-11 years), the effect of interventions (n=45) on standardized BMI was greater in boys.Implications of all the available evidenceThose responsible for public health can be confident in promoting the types of interventions included in this meta-analysis to prevent obesity in children and young people (5-18 years), knowing they are unlikely to increase inequalities. One exception was that interventions for younger children may benefit from being equally engaging and enjoyable for females and males. We regard ‘whole systems approaches’ to comprise separate interventions (components) interconnected via a programme theory and logic model, including the types of interventions included in this meta-analysis. As such, our findings are relevant to those providing guidance on a whole systems approach to reducing the prevalence of obesity in children and young people alongside promoting health equity.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference40 articles.

1. Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity. Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity. Geneva: World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241510066 (accessed 25 March 2024); 2016.

2. Worldwide trends in underweight and obesity from 1990 to 2022: a pooled analysis of 3663 population-representative studies with 222 million children, adolescents, and adults;N. C. D. Risk Factor Collaboration;Lancet,2024

3. Child and adolescent obesity

4. A literature review of evidence for primary prevention of overweight and obesity in healthy weight children and adolescents: A report produced by a working group of the Danish Council on Health and Disease Prevention;Obes Rev,2024

5. UK Government. Childhood Obesity. POSTnote Number 640, April 2021. London: The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PN-0640/POST-PN-0640.pdf (accessed 25 March 2024).

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3