Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-8mjnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T01:32:15.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Family- and school-based correlates of energy balance-related behaviours in 10–12-year-old children: a systematic review within the ENERGY (EuropeaN Energy balance Research to prevent excessive weight Gain among Youth) project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2012

Maïté Verloigne*
Affiliation:
Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Ghent University, Watersportlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
Wendy Van Lippevelde
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Lea Maes
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
Johannes Brug
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics and the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij
Affiliation:
Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Ghent University, Watersportlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
*
*Corresponding author: Email Maite.Verloigne@Ugent.be
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To identify family- and school-based correlates of specific energy balance-related behaviours (physical activity, sedentary behaviour, breakfast consumption, soft drink consumption) among 10–12-year-olds, using the EnRG framework (Environmental Research framework for weight Gain prevention).

Design

A literature review to identify observational studies exploring at least one family- or school-based correlate of the specific behaviours, resulting in seventy-six articles.

Setting

Eighteen studies were conducted in Europe, forty-one studies in North America and seventeen studies in Australasia.

Subjects

Healthy children aged 10–12 years.

Results

Parental and maternal physical activity, doing physical activities with parents and parental logistic support were identified as the most important, positive correlates of physical activity. Parental rules was the most important correlate of sedentary behaviour and was inversely related to it. School socio-economic status was positively related to physical activity and inversely related to sedentary behaviour. The available studies suggested a positive relationship between soft drink availability at home and consumption. Soft drink availability and consumption at school were the most important school-based correlates of soft drink consumption. A permissive parenting style was related to more soft drink consumption and less breakfast consumption.

Conclusions

An important role has been awarded to parents, suggesting parents should be involved in obesity prevention programmes. Despite the opportunities a school can offer, little research has been done to identify school-environmental correlates of energy balance-related behaviours in this age group. Obesity prevention programmes can focus on the most important correlates to maximize the effectiveness of the programme. Future research should aim at longitudinal studies.

Type
Research paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012

Overweight and obesity are highly prevalent among children and are associated with several childhood and further life-course physical and psychological problems( Reference Lobstein, Baur and Uauy 1 , Reference Warschburger 2 ). Subsequently, there is an urgent need to develop effective obesity prevention strategies for children.

Overweight and obesity are caused by a lasting positive energy imbalance( Reference Hill, Wyatt and Melanson 3 ). Because energy intake and expenditure mainly result from specific dietary and physical activity (PA) behaviours, a first step in the development of an obesity prevention programme is to identify these behaviours associated with unnecessary weight gain. The next essential step is to identify the behavioural correlates of these specific energy balance-related behaviours (EBRB) that can be targeted in intervention programmes( Reference Baranowski and Jago 4 Reference Kremers, Visscher and Seidell 6 ). The ‘EuropeaN Energy balance Research to prevent excessive weight Gain among Youth’ (ENERGY) project aims to develop a theory- and evidence-based intervention programme to prevent unnecessary weight gain among children( Reference Brug, te Velde and Chinapaw 7 ). One of the objectives of the ENERGY project is therefore to identify the most important correlates of EBRB via a systematic review.

A number of reviews have summarized the available evidence regarding correlates of EBRB in children and adolescents( Reference Ferreira, van der Horst and Wendel-Vos 8 Reference van der Horst, Chin A Paw and Twisk 16 ). These reviews have focused on a wide age range, mostly capturing 6–18-year-olds. However, children in the transition from childhood to adolescence gain more autonomy and decision-making power regarding PA and dietary behaviours( Reference Golan and Crow 17 ), making this a critical period for changes in health behaviour( Reference Demory-Luce, Morales and Nicklas 18 , Reference Kelder, Peery and Klepp 19 ). Studies show that in this age group children start receiving pocket money that they may use for food purchases, for example, and they have more meals without parental presence( Reference Golan and Crow 17 ). Additionally, these children prepare for or will go from primary school to secondary school: a different school environment characterized by a higher likelihood of presence of vending machines and school shops, and with different food and PA policies( Reference Vereecken, Bobelijn and Maes 20 , Reference Blaes, Baquet and Van Praagh 21 ). Finally, a steep increase in the prevalence of overweight and obesity is observed in this age group( Reference Marild, Bondestam and Bergström 22 ). Because of the specificity of the age group, it is important to gain more insight into the potential drivers of relevant EBRB among 10–12-year-olds. This enables researchers to target the correlates of EBRB specifically for 10–12-year-olds when developing an obesity prevention programme for this age group. Despite the gradually growing independence regarding dietary and PA behaviour choices in this age group, the family environment is still most likely to be of major importance in influencing children's EBRB through a variety of mechanisms such as parental modelling behaviour, encouragement and practices( Reference Golan and Crow 17 , Reference Pugliese and Tinsley 23 ). Parents determine both the physical and social environment of their children( Reference Golan and Crow 17 ), suggesting effective obesity prevention programmes must consider the family as an intervention target( Reference Johnson-Taylor and Everhart 24 ). Also the school plays a significant role, since schools have the capacity to offer various opportunities to practise healthy dietary behaviours and to engage in PA( Reference Story, Kaphingst and French 25 , Reference Wechsler, Devereaux and Davis 26 ). Moreover, the majority of children (including lower social classes) can be easily accessed through schools and children spend a significant amount of their time in schools. A better understanding of the family- and school-based correlates of PA and dietary behaviours in children will add to better informed obesity prevention programmes. Finally, previous reviews have focused mainly on one or two specific EBRB, but EBRB and their correlates should be studied within an energy balance approach; that is, focusing on energy input as well as output( Reference Kremers, Visscher and Seidell 6 ). The present review therefore investigates correlates of several EBRB to focus on both energy intake and expenditure. The EBRB in the current review are PA, sedentary behaviour, breakfast and soft drink consumption. Previous studies and reviews have provided evidence that PA and breakfast consumption are related to overweight and obesity in children( Reference Affenito, Thompson and Barton 27 Reference Jiménez-Pavon, Kelly and Reilly 29 ). For sedentary behaviour and soft drink consumption, the evidence is inconsistent( Reference Marshall, Gorely and Biddle 30 Reference Malik, Schulze and Hu 33 ) and further research is needed to reveal the mechanism between these behaviours and obesity. However, a review conducted as part of the ENERGY project showed that most evidence for an association with overweight and obesity in 10–12-year-old children was found for these four EBRB( Reference Douthwaite, Summerbell and Moore 34 ). Therefore, the present review focuses on correlates of PA, sedentary behaviour, breakfast and soft drink consumption.

A theoretical approach is needed to get insight into the complexity of correlates that are related to EBRB( Reference Kremers 35 ). Kremers et al.( Reference Kremers, de Bruijn and Visscher 36 ) have proposed the Environmental Research framework for weight Gain prevention (EnRG framework), which integrates potential personal psychological correlates, referred to as ‘cognitive’ factors in the model, with environmental factors (adopted from the ANalysis Grid for Environments Linked to Obesity (ANGELO) framework) and identifies important moderators, including personal and behavioural factors, to gain insight into the processes that underlie EBRB. Environmental factors can have a direct impact on EBRB or can be mediated by the personal psychological factors. In the ENERGY project, the EnRG framework is adopted with a specific focus on the family and school environment( Reference Brug, te Velde and Chinapaw 7 ). The specific focus on family and school is important, as the ENERGY project aims to develop a family-involving, school-based intervention to prevent overweight.

In brief, the objective of the present systematic review was to identify family- and school-based correlates of PA, sedentary behaviour, breakfast consumption and soft drink consumption in 10–12-year-old children. The EnRG framework was used to inform the ENERGY project on the most important correlates.

Methods

Search strategy

Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched from 1990 to September 2010. The search strategy described population, study design, context, predictor variables and outcome behaviour. Only English-language published articles were located. The full search strategy is described in online Appendix A.

Inclusion criteria

To be included, studies had to meet all of the following inclusion criteria: (i) studies were limited to samples comprising healthy 10–12-year-old children (mean age: 9·5–12·5 years); (ii) only observational studies were included, whereas dissertations and studies investigating interventions or with a quasi-experimental design were excluded (with the exception of studies reporting on baseline data from intervention studies); and (iii) studies had to examine at least one family- or school-based correlate of PA, sedentary behaviour, breakfast or soft drink consumption.

Selection process

A first selection was made by screening titles and abstracts by the first author using the aforementioned inclusion criteria. After screening the full text of those articles, a final selection of articles to be included was made. Additionally, reference lists of the retrieved articles and review articles were checked for additional relevant papers.

Data extraction

Relevant data on author, date, study design, sample size, participants’ age, study context, outcome measures, instruments and the examined correlates from the included studies were extracted into detailed summary tables. Information on the studies’ characteristics were summarized (see Results).

Categorization of variables

The categorization of the correlates was based on the EnRG framework which includes three main groups: environment, personal psychological mediators and moderators( Reference Kremers, de Bruijn and Visscher 36 ). Since we specifically focused on family- and school-based correlates only environmental factors were included, divided into family- and school-environmental factors. For a further classification of the variables, the ‘types’ of environments according to the ANGELO framework – i.e. one of the key inputs for EnRG – was used( Reference Swinburn, Egger and Raza 37 ). Table 1 provides an overview of all category definitions. The EnRG framework, adopted for the ENERGY project, is described elsewhere( Reference Brug, te Velde and Chinapaw 7 ). Data were summarized into four tables which give an overview of all family- and school-environmental correlates for PA, sedentary behaviour, breakfast and soft drink consumption, respectively (Tables 36). Longitudinal studies were highlighted in bold. Previous studies have solely included correlates examined in at least three studies. Because of the limited amount of studies examining correlates of the four EBRB in 10–12-year-olds, all studied correlates were taken into consideration. This enabled us to identify all variables that have already been investigated for this age group and to provide a comprehensive overview of the correlates by means of a table. Finally, it must be taken into account that one article can investigate a correlate several times, for example when the article investigated correlates of total PA, moderate PA and vigorous PA separately. In that case, the study number was listed three times in the table, since the association between the correlate and the EBRB has basically been investigated three times. Conceptually similar variables were combined for consistency of interpretation, resulting again in the possibility of one article listed multiple times for one correlate. All correlates and their range of definitions are described in online Appendices B, C, D and E.

Table 1 Categorization of the variables

PA, physical activity.

*EnRG (Environmental Research framework for weight Gain prevention) framework, adopted for the ENERGY (EuropeaN Energy balance Research to prevent excessive weight Gain among Youth) project.

†ANGELO (ANalysis Grid for Environments Linked to Obesity) framework.

Coding and summarizing associations

The coding of results was similar to previous reviews( Reference Ferreira, van der Horst and Wendel-Vos 8 , Reference Gorely, Marshall and Biddle 9 , Reference Sallis, Prochaska and Taylor 14 , Reference van der Horst, Chin A Paw and Twisk 16 , Reference Hinkly, Crawford and Salmon 38 ) and is also explained in the footnotes to Tables 36, where each studied correlate received a final summary association code: no association, an indeterminate association or a positive or negative association. As a consequence of the diversity of variables, samples, measures and analyses in the retrieved studies, we have focused on the consistency of the association and not on the strength of the association. If analyses were conducted separately for male and female participants, ‘M’ or ‘F’ was indicated. If analyses were conducted for different time periods (e.g. follow-up of 1 and 2 years), ‘I’ and ‘II’ were indicated.

Results

Papers retrieved

The search for articles in the four databases resulted in 13 258 articles. Based on titles and abstracts, the full text of 316 potentially relevant articles was retrieved and reviewed. This resulted in a total of sixty-six articles that met all inclusion criteria. Another ten articles were included based on the reference lists of retrieved articles and reviews, which brought the final number to seventy-six articles (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Flowchart of the study selection process

General characteristics of the studies reviewed

Table 2 gives an overview of the characteristics of the studies reviewed. In brief, the majority of articles were cross-sectional (fifty-seven studies); eighteen studies (24 %) were conducted in Europe, forty-one studies (54 %) in North America and seventeen studies (22 %) in Australasia. Sample size ranged from thirty-eight to 16 202. Correlates of PA were studied the most (fifty-five studies).

Table 2 General characteristics of the studies reviewed

PA, physical activity; MPA, moderate physical activity; VPA, vigorous physical activity; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, TV, television; y, year(s); m, months.

*For theoretical frameworks, superscript number in parentheses refers to reference in the reference list.

Correlates of energy balance-related behaviours

Table 3 gives an overview of all correlates found for PA, Table 4 for sedentary behaviour, Table 5 for breakfast consumption and Table 6 for soft drink consumption.

Table 3 Correlates of physical activity behaviour in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

n, number of studies that are related to the behaviour; N, number of studies that have investigated the potential correlate; Assoc. code, association code; (F), association applicable only for girls; (M), association applicable only for boys; longitudinal studies in bold; (I) and (II), analyses conducted for different time periods (e.g. different follow-ups); PA, physical activity; SES, socio-economic status.

Association code: 0 = 0–33 % of the findings supporting the association; 00 = ≥4 studies not finding an association; ? = indeterminate finding or 34–59 % of the findings supporting the association; ?? = ≥4 studies with indeterminate findings; + = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a positive association; ++ = ≥4 studies supporting a positive association; – = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a negative association; – – = ≥4 studies supporting a negative association.

*PA reported by parents: 13, 20, 28, 52, 71, 72, 75; PA reported by child: 3, 55.

†PA reported by parents: 4, 13, 34, 39, 43, 46, 71; PA reported by child: 38, 48, 59, 60, 61.

‡PA reported by parents: 4, 13, 39, 71; PA reported by child: 38, 48, 59, 60, 61.

Table 4 Correlates of sedentary behaviour in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

n, number of studies that are related to the behaviour; N, number of studies that have investigated the potential correlate; Assoc. code, association code; (F), association applicable only for girls; (M), association applicable only for boys; longitudinal studies in bold; TV, television; PA, physical activity.

Association code: 0 = 0–33 % of the findings supporting the association; 00 = ≥4 studies not finding an association; ? = indeterminate finding or 34–59 % of the findings supporting the association; ?? = ≥4 studies with indeterminate findings; + = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a positive association; – = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a negative association; – – = ≥4 studies supporting a negative association.

Table 5 Correlates of breakfast consumption in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

n, number of studies that are related to the behaviour; N, number of studies that have investigated the potential correlate; Assoc. code, association code; SES, socio-economic status.

Association code: 0 = 0–33 % of the findings supporting the association; 00 = ≥4 studies not finding an association; + = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a positive association; – = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a negative association.

Table 6 Correlates of soft drink consumption in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

n, number of studies that are related to the behaviour; N, number of studies that have investigated the potential correlate; Assoc. code, association code; longitudinal studies in bold.

Association code: 0 = 0–33 % of the findings supporting the association; ? = indeterminate finding or 34–59 % of the findings supporting the association; + = 60–100 % of the findings supporting a positive association; – = 60 %–100 % of the findings supporting a negative association.

Physical activity behaviour (Table 3)

Family-environmental variables. Thirty-eight family-environmental variables were studied for PA: four physical, twenty-seven sociocultural, four economic and three political environmental variables. Most evidence was found for parental/family PA, maternal PA, doing physical activities with the parents and logistic support. Other positive associations with PA were found for home equipment/opportunities for sedentary behaviour, sedentary time with parents, parental beliefs towards screen-based behaviours and parental enjoyment of screen-based behaviours. Parental sedentary time, parental enjoyment of PA, parental barriers, parental self-efficacy and parental rules/restriction regarding screen-based behaviours were inversely associated with PA. All other variables showed an indeterminate association or no association with PA.

School-environmental variables. Twelve school-environmental variables were studied: six physical, three sociocultural, one economic and two political environmental variables. Walking to and from school, teacher support and school socio-economic status (SES) were positively associated with PA. Having class problems was inversely associated. An inconsistent association with PA was found for participation in school sports (team). The other school environmental variables were not related to PA.

Regarding all studied correlates of PA, one remarkable finding was noticed. The studies that did not find an association between maternal and child PA were North American studies. In contrast, four European studies and one Australian study revealed a positive relationship between maternal and child PA. For all other correlates, no relevant differences were found between European, North American and Australasian results.

Sedentary behaviour (Table 4)

Family-environmental variables. Twenty-eight family-environmental variables were examined: four physical, eighteen sociocultural, five economic and one political environmental variable. Most evidence was found for a negative relationship between parental rules/restriction regarding screen-based behaviours and sedentary behaviour. Living in a two-parent household, parental ethnicity, parental PA preferences, parental knowledge about recommendations and having family dinners were negatively related to sedentary behaviour. A positive association was found for number of televisions (TV) in the household, eating in front of the TV, parental overweight, parental and maternal sedentary time, sedentary time with parents, parental enjoyment of screen-based behaviours, and household income. All other variables showed an indeterminate association or no association with sedentary behaviour.

School-environmental variables. Two school-environmental variables were studied: one physical and one economic environmental variable. School SES was inversely associated with sedentary behaviour. The after-school context was not associated.

Generally, no relevant differences were found between European, North American and Australasian results. One study had a longitudinal design.

Breakfast consumption (Table 5)

Family-environmental variables. Fourteen family-environmental variables were studied: eleven sociocultural, two economic and one political environmental variable. Parental descriptive norms, parental injunctive norms and parental control/supervision were positively related to breakfast consumption. Parental permissiveness, parental catering on demands of children, parental avoidance of negative modelling behaviour and area deprivation were inversely associated. All other variables were not associated with breakfast consumption.

School-environmental variables. Two school-environmental variables were investigated: one sociocultural and one economic environmental variable. Teacher injunctive norms was positively related and school SES was negatively related to breakfast consumption.

Generally, no studies on correlates of breakfast consumption in 10–12-year-olds have yet been conducted in North America. All studies had a cross-sectional design.

Soft drink consumption (Table 6)

Family-environmental variables. Fifteen family-environmental variables were studied: one physical, eleven sociocultural, two economic and one political environmental variable. Availability of soft drinks at home, parental soft drink consumption and permissive parenting style were positively related to soft drink consumption. Having family dinners, household income, parental employment status and parental limits were inversely related. The other variables were not associated with soft drink consumption.

School-environmental variables. Seven school-environmental variables were investigated: three physical, three sociocultural and one economic environmental variable. Availability of soft drinks at school and soft drink consumption at school were positively associated with general soft drink consumption. Participation in healthy school lunches was inversely associated. The other variables showed an indeterminate association or no association with soft drink consumption.

Due to the low number of studies investigating correlates of soft drink consumption in this age group, no relevant comparisons could be made between European, North American and Australasian results.

Discussion

The objective of the present review was to identify family- and school-based correlates of PA, sedentary behaviour, breakfast consumption and soft drink consumption in 10–12-year-olds. To our knowledge, no review has ever investigated correlates of PA, sedentary and dietary behaviour together. The majority of the studies investigated correlates of PA behaviour, resulting in most evidence found for variables related to PA, but also in more inconsistencies between the study results. Those inconsistent results could possibly be due to methodological issues, such as the use of different instruments (child v. parent report, objective v. self-report), differences in validity and reliability of the measurements, differences in the specific sub-behaviours of PA, etc. For sedentary behaviour and especially for breakfast and soft drink consumption, few studies were available; many correlates have hardly been studied or not at all. Our study results further showed that most studies have investigated sociocultural family-environmental variables. One of the most important contributions is the specific evidence found for 10–12-year-old children. The review enables us to say with confidence that the correlates found are specifically related to EBRB of 10–12–year-olds. In previous reviews( Reference Ferreira, van der Horst and Wendel-Vos 8 Reference van der Horst, Chin A Paw and Twisk 16 ), a much broader age range was used, but it is clear that correlates related to health behaviour of a 6-year-old will not be similar to the correlates influencing health behaviour of a 16-year-old, for example( Reference Cillero and Jago 52 ). The influence of parental behaviours varies with age( Reference Pugliese and Tinsley 23 ) and the school environment goes through significant changes in the course of the school years of a child( Reference Vereecken, Bobelijn and Maes 20 , Reference Blaes, Baquet and Van Praagh 21 ).

Physical activity

The most consistent evidence was found for an association of children's PA with parental/family PA, doing PA together with the parents and parental logistic support. Regarding parental PA, our results revealed that the association between mothers’ and children's PA is more consistent than for fathers’, suggesting mothers may be more influential for PA behaviour in this age group. There was no relevant difference by gender in the association between maternal and child PA, while the significant positive associations found between paternal and child PA mostly occurred in girls. The specific reasons why the influence of maternal and paternal PA might differ between boys and girls should be further examined. Additionally, our review demonstrated that doing physical activities together with the child is even more important, since nine out of ten studies confirmed the positive association with the child's PA level. This correlate might be less important in an older adolescent population: in a recent review( Reference Edwardson and Gorely 53 ), parental involvement (i.e. parents doing PA with their child) was only associated with overall PA and leisure-time PA in children, not in adolescents. This emphasizes the importance of studying correlates separately for different age groups. Apart from being active role models for their children's physically active lifestyle( Reference Higgins, Gaul and Gibbons 54 , Reference Ritchie, Welk and Styne 55 ), parents providing logistic support might influence children's PA as well. In brief, parents play an indispensable role in PA promotion among 10–12-year-old children.

Although twelve school-environmental variables were examined, results did not yield a better understanding of the association between the school environment and children's PA behaviour. For example, having class problems was inversely related to PA, but this was only based upon one study, so cannot be considered to provide strong evidence.

Sedentary behaviour

Most evidence was found for an inverse association between parental rules/restriction related to screen-based behaviours and children's actual sedentary behaviour. Encouraging parents to set rules and restrictions related to screen-based behaviours (e.g. TV or computer use) is therefore suggested as a possible strategy to reduce 10–12-year-olds’ sedentary time( Reference Hohepa, Scragg and Schofield 56 , Reference Granich, Rosenberg and Knuiman 57 ). Parents might consequently create limits and monitor their children's sedentary behaviour( Reference Granich, Rosenberg and Knuiman 57 ). Considering TV and computer use, children are recommended to spend no more than 2 h/d on watching TV and using the computer or a game console( Reference Salmon and Shilton 58 ). Moreover, the positive association between the number of TV in the household and sedentary behaviour indicates the significant role of the home environment in influencing children's sedentary time. Given that parents have control over the acquisition of TV and computers, this offers possibilities to modify the home environment with parental assistance( Reference Granich, Rosenberg and Knuiman 57 ). Furthermore, parents can be regarded as role models for sedentary behaviour, since sedentary time of the parents was positively associated with children's sedentary behaviour. Moreover, parents spending more sedentary time together with their children was related to more sedentary behaviour among children. The latter two correlates were also related to children's PA level. This accounts for parental enjoyment of screen-based behaviours and school SES as well. So despite the fact that sedentary behaviour and PA are two separate EBRB with each their own specific correlates( Reference Gorely, Marshall and Biddle 9 , Reference Gordon-Larsen, McMurray and Popkin 59 ), some correlates were significantly related to both behaviours. These correlates are therefore considered as very important, since they are associated with two EBRB.

Breakfast consumption

Little research has been done in the field of correlates of breakfast consumption among 10–12-year-olds. Despite the limited evidence, parental descriptive and injunctive norms seemed to influence breakfast consumption in a positive way. It shows again evidence for parents as positive role models for their children. Three specific parenting practices were associated with breakfast consumption as well: parental permissiveness, parental catering on demands of the children and parental avoidance of negative modelling behaviour. Moreover, not only parents have an influence on their children's breakfast consumption, but teachers could play a role as well considering the positive relationship between teacher injunctive norms and breakfast consumption. Consequently, schools could possibly be involved in an intervention to promote breakfast consumption among children. Nevertheless, no study has ever investigated other school-environmental correlates of breakfast consumption in this age group, possibly due to the fact that breakfast is an event preferably occurring at home.

Soft drink consumption

Comparable to breakfast consumption, not many studies have already examined family- and school-environmental correlates of soft drink consumption in 10–12-year-olds, but the few studies found revealed that soft drink availability at home was positively associated with soft drink consumption in three studies. As parents are primary gatekeepers of purchases at home( Reference Patrick and Nicklas 10 ), parents could restrict soft drink availability and have a major impact upon children's soft drink consumption. Also, if soft drinks are available at home, parents might set up limits concerning soft drink consumption, since parental limits were related to soft drink consumption. Targeting these factors in an intervention programme could lead to less soft drink consumption among children. Regarding the specific parenting practices, only parental permissiveness was related to more soft drink consumption in one study and already related to less breakfast consumption as well. Parents are therefore advised to adopt a more authoritative parenting style to promote healthy behaviour among children( Reference Patrick and Nicklas 10 ). Similar to the other EBRB, parental behaviour was once again positively related to the child's behaviour, although this was investigated by only one study.

The most important school-environmental correlates of soft drink consumption were soft drink availability and consumption at school. This strongly shows that schools can play a central role in an intervention to decrease soft drink consumption. Prohibiting soft drinks at school at that age would engender the decrease in general soft drink consumption.

Limitations

The first limitation lies within the nature of literature reviews of behavioural correlates. Identifying correlates of EBRB through a review can and should inform obesity prevention programmes to contribute to better chances of effectiveness. However, the actual mechanism is a complex web and it should be kept in mind that the present review only revealed associations between single variables and a general outcome measure (covering several specific sub-behaviours), without taking possible moderators and covariates into account. A second limitation is the possibility that not all existing studies on this topic were covered. Some articles might not be found in our databases searched or through our search strategy. The use of only English published data contributes to this limitation too. Conducting subsequent searches on specific correlates that were already identified by the first search strategy could have yielded more studies on this topic. Third, we have focused on the consistency of the association and not on the strength of the association found in primary studies. Further, conceptually similar variables were combined into a single category, even if variables were measured in a different way. Also for the behaviours, we did not differentiate between specific physical and sedentary activities, although correlates can vary depending on the specific activity( Reference Edwardson and Gorely 53 ). Finally, most studies had a cross-sectional design through which only association could be established and not prediction or causation. Longitudinal and cross-sectional results were compared with each other, but no real differences were found between the results, which could be due to the low number of longitudinal studies. Future longitudinal research is needed to gain more insight into the correlates of EBRB.

Conclusions

The current review presents an overview of the studied family- and school-environmental variables. Obesity prevention programmes for this specific age group can focus on the most important modifiable correlates to change children's behaviour. Besides modifiable correlates, the review also identified non-modifiable correlates such as school SES. Such insights can help to identify specific groups ‘at risk’ that can be considered as important target groups for health promotion interventions. Overall, the review provides evidence for the important role that has been awarded to parents, since parental behaviour was related to children's behaviour for all four EBRB. Parents can consequently be considered as key players in the prevention of weight gain among children( Reference Golan and Crow 17 ). Interventions could help parents to create a supportive environment for their children to promote healthy behaviour( Reference Bauer, Neumark-Sztainer and Fulkerson 60 ).

Despite all the opportunities a school can offer in health promotion, little research has been done in the field of school-based correlates of EBRB. More research is needed to focus on important school-environmental factors when developing an intervention programme.

Further, this review did not reveal relevant differences between European, North American and Australasian results. However, the number of studies in each region was often too small to make meaningful comparisons. In case of sufficient studies per region no clear differences were observed. Still little research has been executed in Europe on correlates of EBRB in 10–12-year-olds. If future studies do not contradict this finding, it can be concluded that when developing an obesity prevention programme for European schools as the ENERGY project aims to do, one can rely on non-European studies about correlates of EBRB despite the different obesity context in other continents( Reference Branca, Nikogosian and Lobstein 61 ).

Acknowledgements

The ENERGY project is funded by the Seventh Framework Programme (CORDIS FP7) of the European Commission, HEALTH (FP7-HEALTH-2007-B), Grant Agreement no. 223254. The content of this article reflects only the authors’ views and the European Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein. The authors declare that they have no competing interests. J.B. developed the concept and design of the ENERGY project. M.V. conducted the systematic review with help from W.V.L., L.M. and I.D.B. M.V. wrote the first draft of the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

References

References

1. Lobstein, T, Baur, L, Uauy, R et al. (2004) Obesity in children and young people: a crisis in public health. Obes Rev 5, Suppl. 5, 485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Warschburger, P (2005) The unhappy obese child. Int J Obes (Lond) 29, Suppl. 2, S127S129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Hill, OJ, Wyatt, HR & Melanson, EL (2000) Genetic and environmental contributions to obesity. Med Clin North Am 84, 333346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Baranowski, T & Jago, R (2005) Understanding the mechanisms of change in children's physical activity programs. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 33, 163168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Brug, J, Oenema, A & Ferreira, I (2005) Theory, evidence and intervention mapping to improve behavior nutrition and physical activity interventions. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2, 2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Kremers, SPJ, Visscher, TLS, Seidell, JC et al. (2005) Cognitive determinants of energy balance-related behaviours – measurement issues. Sports Med 35, 923933.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Brug, J, te Velde, SJ, Chinapaw, MJM et al. (2010) Evidence-based development of school-based and family-involved prevention of overweight across Europe: the ENERGY-project's design and conceptual framework. BMC Public Health 10, 276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Ferreira, I, van der Horst, K, Wendel-Vos, W et al. (2006) Environmental correlates of physical activity in youth – a review and update. Obes Rev 8, 129154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Gorely, T, Marshall, SJ & Biddle, SJH (2004) Couch kids: correlates of television viewing among youth. Int J Behav Med 11, 152163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Patrick, H & Nicklas, TA (2005) A review of family and social determinants of children's eating patterns and diet quality. J Am Coll Nutr 24, 8392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Pearson, N, Biddle, SJH & Gorely, T (2008) Family correlates of fruit and vegetable consumption in children and adolescents: a systematic review. Public Health Nutr 12, 267283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Pearson, N, Biddle, SJH & Gorely, T (2009) Family correlates of breakfast consumption among children and adolescents. Appetite 52, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Rasmussen, M, Krolner, R, Klepp, KI et al. (2006) Determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among children and adolescents: a review of the literature. Part I: Quantitative studies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 3, 22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Sallis, JF, Prochaska, JJ & Taylor, WC (2000) A review of correlates of physical activity of children and adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32, 963975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. van der Horst, K, Oenema, A, Ferreira, I et al. (2007) A systematic review of environmental correlates of obesity-related dietary behaviors in youth. Health Educ Res 22, 203226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. van der Horst, K, Chin A Paw, MJ, Twisk, JWR et al. (2007) A brief review on correlates of physical activity and sedentariness in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39, 12411250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Golan, M & Crow, S (2004) Parents are key players in the prevention and treatment of weight-related problems. Nutr Rev 62, 3950.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Demory-Luce, F, Morales, M, Nicklas, T et al. (2004) Changes in food groups consumption patterns from childhood to young adulthood: the Bogalusa Heart Study. J Am Diet Assoc 104, 16841691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Kelder, DH, Peery, CL, Klepp, KI et al. (1994) Longitudinal tracking of adolescent smoking, physical activity and food choice behaviors. Am J Public Health 84, 11211126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Vereecken, CA, Bobelijn, K & Maes, L (2005) School food policy at primary and secondary schools in Belgium-Flanders: does it influence young people's food habits? Eur J Clin Nutr 59, 271277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Blaes, A, Baquet, G, Van Praagh, E et al. (2011) Physical activity patterns in French youth – from childhood to adolescence – monitored with high-frequency accelerometry. Am J Hum Biol 23, 353358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Marild, S, Bondestam, M, Bergström, R et al. (2004) Prevalence trends of obesity and overweight among 10-year-old children in western Sweden and relationship with parental body mass index. Acta Paediatr 93, 15881595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Pugliese, J & Tinsley, B (2007) Parental socialization of child and adolescent physical activity: a meta-analysis. J Fam Psychol 21, 331343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Johnson-Taylor, WL & Everhart, JE (2006) Modifiable environmental and behavioral determinants of overweight among children and adolescents: report of a workshop. Obesity (Silver Spring) 14, 929966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Story, M, Kaphingst, KM & French, S (2006) The role of schools in obesity prevention. Future Child 16, 109142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Wechsler, H, Devereaux, RS, Davis, M et al. (2000) Using the school environment to promote physical activity and healthy eating. Prev Med 31, Suppl. 2, S121S137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Affenito, SG, Thompson, DR, Barton, BA et al. (2005) Breakfast consumption by African-American and white adolescent girls correlates positively with calcium and fiber intake and negatively with body mass index. J Am Diet Assoc 105, 938945.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Elgar, FJ, Roberts, C, Moore, L et al. (2005) Sedentary behaviour, physical activity and weight problems in adolescents in Wales. Public Health 119, 518524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29. Jiménez-Pavon, D, Kelly, J & Reilly, JJ (2010) Associations between objectively measured habitual physical activity and adiposity in children and adolescents: systematic review. Int J Pediatr Obes 5, 318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30. Marshall, SJ, Gorely, T & Biddle, SJH (2006) A descriptive epidemiology of screen-based media use in youth: a review and critique. J Adolesc 29, 333349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31. Rey-Lopez, JP, Vicente-Rodriguez, G, Biosca, M et al. (2008) Sedentary behaviour and obesity development in children and adolescents. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 18, 242251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32. Bachman, CM, Baranowski, T & Nicklas, TA (2006) Is there an association between sweetened beverages and adiposity? Nutr Rev 64, 153174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33. Malik, VS, Schulze, MB & Hu, FB (2006) Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 84, 274288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34. Douthwaite, W, Summerbell, CD & Moore, H (2011) Identifying the most important energy balance behaviours among 10–12 year olds, and their parents, that are associated with excessive weight gain and overweight. WP2–Phase 1 Report. http://www.projectenergy.eu/oeffentlicher_bereich/publications/reports/WP2-Phase%201%20Report%20def.pdf (accessed November 2011).Google Scholar
35. Kremers, SP (2010) Theory and practice in the study of influences on energy balance-related behaviors. Patient Educ Couns 79, 291298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36. Kremers, SPJ, de Bruijn, GJ, Visscher, TLS et al. (2006) Environmental influences on energy balance-related behaviors: a dual-process view. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 3, 9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Swinburn, B, Egger, G & Raza, F (1999) Dissecting obesogenic environments: the development and application of a framework for identifying and prioritizing environmental interventions for obesity. Prev Med 29, 563570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38. Hinkly, T, Crawford, D, Salmon, J et al. (2008) Preschool children and physical activity. A review of correlates. Am J Prev Med 34, 435441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39. Bandura, A (1986) Social Foundations of Thoughts and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
40. Ajzen, I & Fishbein, M (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
41. Bandura, A (1977) A Social Learning Theory. London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
42. Welk, GJ (1999) The youth physical activity promotion mode: a conceptual bridge between theory and practice. Quest 51, 523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43. Kimiecik, JC, Horn, TS & Shurin, CS (1996) Relationships among children's beliefs, perceptions of their parents’ beliefs, and their moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Res Q Exerc Sport 67, 324336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44. Schultz, A & Northridge, M (2004) Social determinants of health: implications for environmental health promotion. Health Educ Behav 31, 455471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. Pender, NJ, Walker, SN, Frank-Stromborg, M et al. (1990) The Health Promotion Model: Refinement and Validation – Final Report. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Nursing Research.Google Scholar
46. Kohl, HW & Hobbs, KE (1998) Development of physical activity behaviours among children and adolescents. Pediatrics 101, 549554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47. Sallis, JF, Simons-Morton, EBG, Stone, EJ et al. (1992) Determinants of physical activity and interventions in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc 24, Suppl. 6, S248S257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48. Stokols, D (1992) Establishing and maintaining healthy environments. Towards a social ecology of health promotion. Am Psychol 47, 622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49. Breslow, L (1996) Social ecological strategies for promoting healthy lifestyles. Am J Health Promot 10, 253257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
50. Eccles, JS, Addler, TF, Futterman, R et al. (1983) Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In Achievement and Achievement Association, pp. 75146 [JT Spence, editor]. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.Google Scholar
51. Ferraro, KF (1995) Fear of Crime: Interpreting Victimization Risk. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
52. Cillero, IH & Jago, R (2010) Systematic review of correlates of screen-viewing among young children. Prev Med 51, 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53. Edwardson, CL & Gorely, T (2010) Parental influences on different types and intensities of physical activity in youth: a systematic review. Psychol Sport Exerc 11, 522535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54. Higgins, JW, Gaul, C, Gibbons, S et al. (2003) Factors influencing physical activity levels among Canadian youth. Can J Public Health 94, 4551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
55. Ritchie, LD, Welk, G, Styne, D et al. (2005) Family environment and pediatric overweight: what is a parent to do? J Am Diet Assoc 105, Suppl. 1, S70S79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
56. Hohepa, M, Scragg, R, Schofield, G et al. (2009) Social support for youth physical activity: importance of siblings, parents, friends and school support across a segmented school day. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 4, 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
57. Granich, J, Rosenberg, M, Knuiman, M et al. (2010) Understanding children's sedentary behaviour: a qualitative study of the family home environment. Health Educ Res 25, 199210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
58. Salmon, J & Shilton, T (2004) Endorsement of physical activity recommendations for children and youth in Australia. J Sci Med Sport 7, 405406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
59. Gordon-Larsen, P, McMurray, RG & Popkin, BM (2000) Determinants of adolescent physical activity and inactivity patterns. Pediatrics 105, E83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
60. Bauer, KW, Neumark-Sztainer, D, Fulkerson, JA et al. (2011) Familial correlates of adolescent girls’ physical activity, television use, dietary intake, weight, and body composition. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 8, 25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
61. Branca, F, Nikogosian, H & Lobstein, T (2007) The Challenge of Obesity in the WHO European Region and the Strategies for Response. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Ofice for Europe.Google Scholar

Bibliography

1. Abbot, RA, Macdonald, D, Nambiar, S et al. (2009) The association between walking to school, daily step counts and meeting step targets in 5- to 17-year-old Australian children. Pediatr Exerc Sci 21, 520532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Ball, K, Cleland, VJ, Timperio, AF et al. (2009) Socioeconomic position and children's physical activity and sedentary behaviors: longitudinal findings from the CLAN study. J Phys Act Health 6, 289298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Barnett, TA, O'Loughlin, J & Paradis, G (2002) One- and two-year predictors of decline in physical activity among inner-city schoolchildren. Am J Prev Med 23, 121128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Bois, JE, Sarrazin, PG, Brustad, RJ et al. (2005) Elementary schoolchildren's perceived competence and physical activity involvement: the influences of parents’ role modelling behaviours and perceptions of their child's competence. Psychol Sport Exerc 6, 381397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Briefel, RR, Wilson, A & Gleason, PM (2009) Consumption of low-nutrient, energy-dense foods and beverages at school, home, and other locations among school lunch participants and nonparticipants. J Am Diet Assoc 109, Suppl. 2, S79S90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Briefel, RR, Crepinsek, MK, Cabili, C et al. (2009) School food environments and practices affect dietary behaviors of US public school children. J Am Diet Assoc 109, Suppl. 2, S91S107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Brodersen, NH, Steptoe, A, Boniface, DR et al. (2007) Trends in physical activity and sedentary behavior in adolescence: ethnic and socioeconomic differences. Br J Sports Med 41, 140144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Carlson, SA, Fulton, JE, Lee, SM et al. (2010) Influence of limit-setting and participation in physical activity on youth screen time. Pediatrics 126, E89E96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Carver, A, Timperio, A, Hesketh, K et al. (2010) Are children and adolescents less active if parents restrict their physical activity and active transport due to perceived risk? Soc Sci Med 70, 17991805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Cheng, TSY, Tse, LA, Yu, ITS et al. (2008) Children's perceptions of parental attitude affecting breakfast skipping in primary sixth-grade students. J Sch Health 78, 203208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Cleland, V, Timperio, A, Salmon, J et al. (2010) Predictors of time spent outdoors among children: 5-year longitudinal findings. J Epidemiol Community Health 64, 400406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Cleland, V, Dwyer, T, Blizzard, L et al. (2008) The provision of compulsory school physical activity: associations with physical activity, fitness and overweight in childhood and twenty years later. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 5, 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Crawford, D, Cleland, V, Timperio, A et al. (2010) The longitudinal influence of home and neighbourhood environments on children's body mass index and physical activity over 5 years: the CLAN study. Int J Obes (Lond) 34, 11771187.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Cullen, KW & Zakeri, I (2004) Fruits, vegetables, milk and sweetened beverages consumption and access to à la carte/snack bar meals at school. Am J Public Health 94, 463467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Davison, KK & Jago, R (2009) Change in parent and peer support across ages 9 to 15 yr and adolescent girls’ physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41, 18161825.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16. Denney-Wilson, E, Crawford, D, Dobbins, T et al. (2009) Influences on consumption of soft drinks and fast foods in adolescents. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 18, 447452.Google Scholar
17. DiLorenzo, TM, Stucky-Ropp, RC, Van der Wal, JS et al. (1998) Determinants of exercise among children. II. A longitudinal analysis. Prev Med 27, 470477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Dishman, RK, Dunn, AL, Sallis, JF et al. (2010) Social-cognitive correlates of physical activity in a multi-ethnic cohort of middle-school girls: two-year prospective study. J Pediatr Psychol 35, 188198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Dollman, J & Lewis, NR (2009) Interactions of socioeconomic position with psychosocial and environmental correlates of children's physical activity: an observational study of South Australian families. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 6, 56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Duncan, SC, Duncan, TE, Strycker, LA et al. (2007) A cohort-sequential latent growth model of physical activity from ages 12 to 17 years. Ann Behav Med 33, 8089.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Fernandes, MM (2008) The effect of soft drink availability in elementary schools on consumption. J Am Diet Assoc 108, 14451452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Franzini, L, Elliott, MN, Cuccaro, P et al. (2009) Influences of physical and social neighborhood environments on children's physical activity and obesity. Am J Public Health 99, 271278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Freitas, D, Maia, J, Beunen, G et al. (2007) Socio-economic status, growth, physical activity and fitness: The Madeira Growth Study. Ann Hum Biol 34, 107122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Gaina, A, Sekine, M, Chandola, T et al. (2009) Mother employment status and nutritional patterns in Japanese junior high schoolchildren. Int J Obes (Lond) 33, 753757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Garcia, AW, Broda, MAN, Frenn, M et al. (1995) Gender and developmental differences in exercise beliefs among youth and prediction of their exercise behavior. J Sch Health 65, 213219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Gillander Gådin, K & Hammarström, A (2002) Can school-related factors predict future health behaviour among young adolescents? Public Health 116, 2229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Gillman, MW, Rifas-Shiman, SL, Fraizer, L et al. (2000) Family dinner and diet quality among older children and adolescents. Arch Fam Med 9, 235240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Griffith, JR, Clasey, JL, King, JT et al. (2007) Role of parents in determining children's physical activity. World J Pediatr 3, 265270.Google Scholar
29. Grimm, GC, Harnack, L & Story, M (2004) Factors associated with soft drink consumption in school-aged children. J Am Diet Assoc 104, 12441249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30. He, M, Piché, L, Beynon, C et al. (2010) Screen-related sedentary behaviors: children's and parents’ attitudes, motivations, and practices. J Nutr Edu Behav 42, 1725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31. Heitzler, CD, Martin, SL, Duke, J et al. (2006) Correlates of physical activity in a national sample of children aged 9–13 years. Prev Med 42, 254260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32. Hesketh, K, Graham, M & Waters, E (2008) Children's after-school activity: associations with weight status and family circumstance. Pediatr Exerc Sci 20, 8494.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33. Huang, S, Hung, W, Sharpe, PA et al. (2010) Neighborhood environment and physical activity among urban and rural schoolchildren in Taiwan. Health Place 16, 470476.Google Scholar
34. Kahn, JA, Huang, B, Gillman, MW et al. (2008) Patterns and determinants of physical activity in US adolescents. J Adolesc Health 42, 369377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35. Kimm, SYS, Glynn, NW, Kriska, AM et al. (2002) Decline in physical activity in black girls and white girls during adolescence. N Engl J Med 347, 709715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36. Kolle, E, Steene-Johannessen, J, Klasson-Heggebø, L et al. (2009) A 5-yr change in Norwegian 9-yr-olds’ objectively assessed physical activity level. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41, 13681373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Lindquist, CH, Reynolds, KD & Goran, MI (1999) Sociocultural determinants of physical activity among children. Prev Med 29, 305312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38. Madsen, KA, McCulloch, CE & Crawford, PB (2009) Parent modeling: perceptions of parents’ physical activity predict girls’ activity throughout adolescence. J Pediatr 154, 278283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39. McMinn, AM, van Sluijs, EMF, Wedderkopp, N et al. (2008) Sociocultural correlates of physical activity in children and adolescents: findings from the Danish arm of the European Youth Heart Study. Pediatr Exerc Sci 20, 319332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40. Moore, GF, Tapper, K, Murphy, S et al. (2007) Associations between deprivation, attitudes towards eating, breakfast and breakfast eating behaviours in 9–11-year-olds. Public Health Nutr 10, 582589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41. Moore, GF, Moore, L & Murphy, S (2009) Normative and cognitive correlates of breakfast skipping in 9–11-year-old schoolchildren in Wales. Appetite 53, 332337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42. Nichol, ME, Pickett, W & Janssen, I (2009) Associations between school recreational environments and physical activity. J Sch Health 79, 247254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43. Nichols-English, GJ, Lemmon, CR, Litaker, MS et al. (2006) Relations of black mothers’ and daughters’ body fatness, physical activity beliefs and behavior. Ethn Dis 16, 172179.Google Scholar
44. Nickelson, J, Roseman, MG & Forthofer, MS (2003) Associations between parental limits, school vending machine purchases, and soft drink consumption among Kentucky middle school students. J Nutr Educ Behav 42, 115122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45. O'Loughlin, J, Paradis, G, Kishchuk, N et al. (1999) Prevalence and correlates of physical activity behaviors among elementary schoolchildren in multiethnic, low income, inner-city neighborhoods in Montreal, Canada. Ann Epidemiol 9, 397407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46. Panter, JR, Jones, AP, van Sluijs, EMF et al. (2010) Attitudes, social support and environmental perceptions as predictors of active commuting behaviour in school children. J Epidemiol Community Health 64, 4148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47. Panter, JR, Jones, AP, van Sluijs, EMF et al. (2010) Neighborhood, route, and school environments and children's active commuting. Am J Prev Med 38, 268278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48. Pate, RR, Trost, SG, Felton, GM et al. (1997) Correlates of physical activity in rural youth. Res Q Exerc Sport 68, 241248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
49. Piko, BF & Keresztes, N (2008) Sociodemographic and socioeconomic variations in leisure time physical activity in a sample of Hungarian youth. Int J Public Health 53, 306310.Google Scholar
50. Riddoch, CJ, Mattocks, C, Deere, K et al. (2007) Objective measurement of levels and patterns of physical activity. Arch Dis Child 92, 963969.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
51. Roemmich, JN, Epstein, LH, Raja, S et al. (2007) The neighborhood and home environments: disparate relationships with physical activity and sedentary behaviors in youth. Ann Behav Med 33, 2938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52. Sallis, JF, Alcaraz, JE, McKenzie, TL et al. (1999) Predictors of change in children's physical activity over 20 months – variations by gender and level of adiposity. Am J Prev Med 16, 222229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
53. Salmon, J, Timperio, A, Telford, A et al. (2005) Association of family environment with children's television viewing and with low level of physical activity. Obes Res 13, 19391951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54. Saunders, RP, Pate, RR, Felton, GM et al. (1997) Development of questionnaires to measure psychosocial influences on children's physical activity. Prev Med 26, 241247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
55. Springer, AE, Kelder, SH & Hoelscher, DM (2006) Social support, physical activity and sedentary behavior among 6th-grade girls: a cross-sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 3, 8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
56. Springer, AE, Kelder, SH, Barroso, CR et al. (2010) Parental influences on television watching among children living on the Texas–Mexico border. Prev Med 51, 112117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57. Timperio, A, Crawford, D, Telford, A et al. (2003) Perceptions about the local neighborhood and walking and cycling among children. Prev Med 38, 3947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Timperio, A, Ball, K, Salmon, J et al. (2006) Family, social, and environmental correlates of active commuting to school. Am J Prev Med 30, 4551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
59. Trost, SG, Pate, RR, Ward, DS et al. (1999) Determinants of physical activity in active and low-active, sixth grade African-American youth. J Sch Health 69, 2933.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
60. Trost, SG, Pate, RR, Ward, DS et al. (1999) Correlates of objectively measured physical activity in preadolescent youth. Am J Prev Med 17, 120126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
61. Trost, SG, Pate, RR, Saunders, R et al. (1997) A prospective study of the determinants of physical activity in rural fifth-grade children. Prev Med 26, 257263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
62. Unger, JB, Reynolds, K, Shakib, S et al. (2004) Acculturation, physical activity, and fast-food consumption among Asian-American and Hispanic adolescents. J Community Health 29, 467481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
63. Utter, J, Scragg, R, Mhurchu, CN et al. (2007) At-home breakfast consumption among New Zealand: associations with body mass index and related nutrition behaviors. J Am Diet Assoc 107, 570576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
64. Utter, J, Scragg, R & Schaaf, D (2006) Associations between television viewing and consumption of commonly advertised foods among New Zealand children and young adolescents. Public Health Nutr 9, 606612.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
65. Van Lenthe, FJ, Boreham, CA, Twisk, JWR et al. (2001) Socio-economic position and coronary heart disease risk factors in youth – findings from the Young Hearts Project in Northern Ireland. Eur J Public Health 11, 4350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
66. van Sluijs, EMF, Skidmore, PML, Mwanza, K et al. (2008) Physical activity and dietary behaviour in a population-based sample of British 10-year old children: the SPEEDY study (Sport, Physical activity and Eating behaviour: Environmental Determinants in Young people). BMC Public Health 8, 388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
67. Vereecken, C, Legiest, E, De Bourdeaudhuij, I et al. (2009) Associations between general parenting styles and specific food-related parenting practices and children's food consumption. Am J Health Promot 23, 233240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
68. Villard, LC, Rydén, L & Stahle, A (2007) Predictors of healthy behaviours in Swedish school children. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 14, 366372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
69. Voorhees, CC, Murray, D, Welk, G et al. (2005) The role of peer social network factors and physical activity in adolescent girls. Am J Health Behav 29, 183190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70. Vue, H & Reicks, M (2007) Individual and environmental influences on intake of calcium-rich food and beverages by young Hmong adolescent girls. J Nutr Educ Behav 39, 264272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
71. Wagner, A, Klein-Platat, C, Arveiler, D et al. (2004) Parent–child physical activity relationships in 12-year old French students do not depend on family socioeconomic status. Diabetes Metab 30, 359366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
72. Welk, GJ, Wood, K & Morss, G (2003) Parental influences on physical activity in children: an exploration of potential mechanisms. Pediatr Exerc Sci 15, 1933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
73. Wiecha, JL, Finkelstein, D, Troped, PJ et al. (2006) School vending machine use and fast-food restaurant use are associated with sugar-sweetened beverage intake in youth. J Am Diet Assoc 106, 16241630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
74. Wiecha, JL, Sobol, AM, Peterson, KE et al. (2001) Household television access: associations with screen time, reading, and homework among youth. Ambul Pediatr 1, 244251.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
75. Wrotniak, BH, Zimmer, N, Dingle, A et al. (2007) Physical activity, health, and dietary patterns of middle school children. Pediatr Phys Ther 19, 203210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
76. Yannakoulia, M, Papanikolaou, K, Hatzopoulou, I et al. (2008) Association between family divorce and children's BMI and meal patterns: The GENDAI study. Obesity (Silver Spring) 16, 13821387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1 Categorization of the variables

Figure 1

Fig. 1 Flowchart of the study selection process

Figure 2

Table 2 General characteristics of the studies reviewed

Figure 3

Table 3 Correlates of physical activity behaviour in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

Figure 4

Table 4 Correlates of sedentary behaviour in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

Figure 5

Table 5 Correlates of breakfast consumption in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

Figure 6

Table 6 Correlates of soft drink consumption in 10–12-year-old children: bibliography numbers of studies reporting a positive correlation (+), a negative correlation (–) or no correlation (0) among the studies reviewed

Supplementary material: PDF

Verloigne Supplementary Appendices

Verloigne Supplementary Appendices

Download Verloigne Supplementary Appendices(PDF)
PDF 127.1 KB