Sitting too much: a hierarchy of socio-demographic correlates

Too much sitting (extended sedentary time) is recognized as a public health concern in Europe and beyond. Time spent sedentary is influenced and conditioned by clusters of individual-level and contextual (upstream) factors. Identifying population subgroups that sit too much could help to develop targeted interventions to reduce sedentary time. We explored the relative importance of socio-demographic correlates of sedentary time in adults across Europe. We used data from 26,617 adults who participated in the 2013 Special Eurobarometer 412 "Sport and physical activity". Participants from all 28 EU Member States were randomly selected and interviewed face-to-face. Self-reported sedentary time was dichotomized into sitting less or >7.5h/day. A Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID) algorithm was used to create a tree that hierarchically partitions the data on the basis of the independent variables (i.e., socio-demographic factors) into homogeneous (sub)groups with regard to sedentary time. This allows for the tentative identification of population segments at risk for unhealthy sedentary behaviour. Overall, 18.5% of the respondents reported sitting >7.5h/day. Occupation was the primary discriminator. The subgroup most likely to engage in extensive sitting were higher educated, had white-collar jobs, reported no difficulties with paying bills, and used the internet frequently. Clear socio-demographic profiles were identified for adults across Europe who engage in extended sedentary time. Furthermore, physically active participants were consistently less likely to engage in longer daily sitting times. In general, those with more indicators of higher wealth were more likely to spend more time sitting

European Sitting Championship: Prevalence and Correlates of Self-Reported Sitting Time in the 28 European Union Member States

Objective: Sedentary behaviour is increasingly recognized as an important health risk, but comparable data across Europe are scarce. The objective of this study was to explore the prevalence and correlates of self-reported sitting time in adults across and within the 28 European Union Member States. Methods: This study reports data from the Special Eurobarometer 412. In 2013, 27,919 randomly selected Europeans (approximately 1000 per Member State) were interviewed face-to-face. Sitting time on a usual day was self-reported and dichotomised into sitting less- and more than 7.5 hours per day. Uni- and multivariate odds ratios of sitting more than 7.5 hours per day were assessed by country and socio-demographic variables using binary logistic regression analyses. The analyses were stratified by country to study the socio-demographic correlates of sitting time within the different countries. Results: A total of 26,617 respondents were included in the analyses. Median sitting time was five hours per day. Across Europe, 18.5 percent of the respondents reported to sit more than 7.5 hours per day, with substantial variation between countries (ranging from 8.9 to 32.1 percent). In general, northern European countries reported more sitting than countries in the south of Europe. ‘Current occupation’ and ‘age when stopped education’ were found to be the strongest correlates of sitting time, both across Europe and within most Member States. Compared to manual workers, the odds ratio of sitting more than 7.5 hours per day was 5.00 for people with white collar occupations, 3.84 for students, and 3.65 for managers. Conclusions: There is substantial variation in self-reported sitting time among European adults across countries as well as socio-demographic groups. While regular surveillance of (objectively measured) sedentary behaviour is needed, the results of this study provide entry points for developing targeted interventions aimed at highly sedentary populations, such as people with sedentary occupations

Changes in children’s television and computer time according to parental education, parental income and ethnicity: A 6-year longitudinal EYHS study

Objectives : To investigate changes in children's television and computer time according to three socioeconomic status (SES) indicators. Design : Prospective cohort study. Methods : Data were drawn from the European Youth Heart Study and included longitudinal data collected in 1997 and 2003 in Denmark. Television and computer time were self-reported by children. Parental education, income and ethnicity were parent-reported. Baseline data were available for 549 children (47.0% boys, 9.6 years). Generalized linear mixed models analyzed whether changes in television and computer time from baseline to follow-up differed according to the SES-indicators. Result : TV viewing time increased with 25% over time (ExpB = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.04-1.50). At both time points, children with two higher educated parents viewed 25% less hours of television than children with no higher educated parents (ExpB = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.60-0.94) and one higher educated parent (ExpB = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.59-0.97). Among children with no higher educated parents the odds of being in a higher category of computer time increased with 80% over time (OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.24-2.60). Among children with two higher educated parents the odds of being in a higher category of computer time decreased with 45% over time (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.32-0.94). The association with ethnicity showed that white children had 42% lower odds (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.34-1.00) of being in a higher category of computer time than non-white children. No significant associations were found for parental income. Conclusions : The most important SES measure of screen-based behaviors in children was parental education. Ethnicity was only associated with computer time. Financial resources were less relevant for changes in television viewing and computer use

Variation in population levels of sedentary time in European adults according to cross European studies: a systematic literature review within DEDIPAC

peer-reviewedBackground: Sedentary behaviour is increasingly recognized as a public health risk that needs to be monitored at the population level. Across Europe, there is increasing interest in assessing population levels of sedentary time. This systematic literature review aims to provide an overview of all existing cross-European studies that measure sedentary time in adults, to describe the variation in population levels across these studies and to discuss the impact of assessment methods. Methods: Six literature databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus and OpenGrey) were searched, supplemented with backward- and forward tracking and searching authors’ and experts’ literature databases. Articles were included if they reported on observational studies measuring any form of sedentary time in the general population in two or more European countries. Each record was reviewed, extracted and assessed by two independent researchers, and disagreements were resolved by a third researcher. The review protocol of this review is registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42014010335. Results: Of the 9,756 unique articles that were identified in the search, twelve articles were eligible for inclusion in this review, reporting on six individual studies and three Eurobarometer surveys. These studies represented 2 to 29 countries, and 321 to 65,790 participants. Eleven studies focused on total sedentary time, while one studied screen time. The majority of studies used questionnaires to assess sedentary time, while two studies used accelerometers. Total sedentary time was reported most frequently and varied from 150 (median) to 620 (mean) minutes per day aConclusions: One third of European countries were not included in any of the studies. Objective measures of European adults are currently limited, and most studies used single-item self-reported questions without assessing sedentary behaviour types or domains. Findings varied substantially between studies, meaning that population levels of sedentary time in European adults are currently unknown. In general, people living in northern Europe countries appear to report more sedentary time than southern Europeans. The findings of this review highlight the need for standardisation of the measurement methods and the added value of cross-European surveillance of sedentary behaviour.cross studies and countries

Towards the integration and development of a cross-European research network and infrastructure:the DEterminants of DIet and Physical ACtivity (DEDIPAC) Knowledge Hub

To address major societal challenges and enhance cooperation in research across Europe, the European Commission has initiated and facilitated ‘joint programming’. Joint programming is a process by which Member States engage in defining, developing and implementing a common strategic research agenda, based on a shared vision of how to address major societal challenges that no Member State is capable of resolving independently. Setting up a Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) should also contribute to avoiding unnecessary overlap and repetition of research, and enable and enhance the development and use of standardised research methods, procedures and data management. The Determinants of Diet and Physical Activity (DEDIPAC) Knowledge Hub (KH) is the first act of the European JPI ‘A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life’. The objective of DEDIPAC is to contribute to improving understanding of the determinants of dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. DEDIPAC KH is a multi-disciplinary consortium of 46 consortia and organisations supported by joint programming grants from 12 countries across Europe. The work is divided into three thematic areas: (I) assessment and harmonisation of methods for future research, surveillance and monitoring, and for evaluation of interventions and policies; (II) determinants of dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours across the life course and in vulnerable groups; and (III) evaluation and benchmarking of public health and policy interventions aimed at improving dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. In the first three years, DEDIPAC KH will organise, develop, share and harmonise expertise, methods, measures, data and other infrastructure. This should further European research and improve the broad multi-disciplinary approach needed to study the interactions between multilevel determinants in influencing dietary, physical activity and sedentary behaviours. Insights will be translated into more effective interventions and policies for the promotion of healthier behaviours and more effective monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of such intervention

Associations of self-reported physical activity and anxiety symptoms and status among 7,874 Irish adults across harmonised datasets: a DEDIPAC-study

Background: Anxiety is an adaptive response to an objective or perceived threat; however, when symptoms become severe and chronic it that can become a maladaptive anxiety disorder. Limited evidence suggests that physical activity may be associated with prevention against anxiety. This study uses data from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) and The Mitchelstown Cohort Study to investigate cross-sectional associations between physical activity and anxiety symptoms and status among Irish adults. Methods: Both datasets were harmonized (n =7874). The short form International Physical Activity Questionnaire measured physical activity. Participants were classified as meeting World Health Organization physical activity guidelines ((≥150 min weekly of moderate intensity physical activity, ≥75 min weekly of vigorous intensity physical activity, or ≥ 600 MET-minutes) or not. They were also divided into three groups based on weekly MET-minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (Low: 0-599; Moderate: 600-1199; High: =1200), and three groups based on weekly minutes of walking (Low: 0-209; Moderate: 210-419; High: 420+). Anxiety symptoms were measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale with a score of =8 indicating anxiety. Binomial logistic regression, adjusted for relevant confounders examined physical activity-anxiety associations. Results: : Females had higher rates of anxiety than males (28.0% vs 20.0%; p < 0.001). Following adjustment for relevant covariates, meeting physical activity guidelines was associated with 13.5% (95% CI: 2.0–23.7; p = 0.023) lower odds of anxiety. Moderate and High physical activity were associated with 13.5% (− 11.0–32.6; p = 0.254) and 13.6% (1.4–4.2; p = 0.030) lower odds of anxiety compared to Low physical activity, respectively. Moderate and High walking were associated with 2.1% (− 14.5–16.3; p = 0.789) and 5.1% (− 9.3–17.6; p = 0.467) lower odds of anxiety compared to Low walking, respectively

Variation in population levels of physical activity in European adults according to cross-European studies: a systematic literature review within DEDIPAC

peer-reviewedBackground: Physical inactivity is a well-known public health risk that should be monitored at the population level. Physical activity levels are often surveyed across Europe. This systematic literature review aims to provide an overview of all existing cross-European studies that assess physical activity in European adults, describe the variation in population levels according to these studies, and discuss the impact of the assessment methods. Methods: Six literature databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus and OpenGrey) were searched, supplemented with backward- and forward tracking and searching authors’ and experts’ literature databases. Articles were included if they reported on observational studies measuring total physical activity and/or physical activity in leisure time in the general population in two or more European countries. Each record was reviewed, extracted and assessed by two independent researchers and disagreements were resolved by a third researcher. The review protocol of this review is registered in the PROSPERO database under registration number CRD42014010334. Results: Of the 9,756 unique identified articles, twenty-five were included in this review, reporting on sixteen different studies, including 2 to 35 countries and 321 to 274,740 participants. All but two of the studies used questionnaires to assess physical activity, with the majority of studies using the IPAQ-short questionnaire. The remaining studies used accelerometers. The percentage of participants who either were or were not meeting the physical activity recommendations was the most commonly reported outcome variable, with the percentage of participants meeting the recommendations ranging from 7 % to 96 % across studies and countries. Conclusions: The included studies showed substantial variation in the assessment methods, reported outcome variables and, consequently, the presented physical activity levels. Because of this, absolute population levels of physical activity in European adults are currently unknown. However, when ranking countries, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain generally appear to be among the less active countries. Objective data of adults across Europe is currently limited. These findings highlight the need for standardisation of the measurement methods, as well as cross-European monitoring of physical activity levels

The SOS-framework (Systems of Sedentary behaviours): an international transdisciplinary consensus framework for the study of determinants, research priorities and policy on sedentary behaviour across the life course: a DEDIPAC-study.

BACKGROUND: Ecological models are currently the most used approaches to classify and conceptualise determinants of sedentary behaviour, but these approaches are limited in their ability to capture the complexity of and interplay between determinants. The aim of the project described here was to develop a transdisciplinary dynamic framework, grounded in a system-based approach, for research on determinants of sedentary behaviour across the life span and intervention and policy planning and evaluation. METHODS: A comprehensive concept mapping approach was used to develop the Systems Of Sedentary behaviours (SOS) framework, involving four main phases: (1) preparation, (2) generation of statements, (3) structuring (sorting and ranking), and (4) analysis and interpretation. The first two phases were undertaken between December 2013 and February 2015 by the DEDIPAC KH team (DEterminants of DIet and Physical Activity Knowledge Hub). The last two phases were completed during a two-day consensus meeting in June 2015. RESULTS: During the first phase, 550 factors regarding sedentary behaviour were listed across three age groups (i.e., youths, adults and older adults), which were reduced to a final list of 190 life course factors in phase 2 used during the consensus meeting. In total, 69 international delegates, seven invited experts and one concept mapping consultant attended the consensus meeting. The final framework obtained during that meeting consisted of six clusters of determinants: Physical Health and Wellbeing (71% consensus), Social and Cultural Context (59% consensus), Built and Natural Environment (65% consensus), Psychology and Behaviour (80% consensus), Politics and Economics (78% consensus), and Institutional and Home Settings (78% consensus). Conducting studies on Institutional Settings was ranked as the first research priority. The view that this framework captures a system-based map of determinants of sedentary behaviour was expressed by 89% of the participants. CONCLUSION: Through an international transdisciplinary consensus process, the SOS framework was developed for the determinants of sedentary behaviour through the life course. Investigating the influence of Institutional and Home Settings was deemed to be the most important area of research to focus on at present and potentially the most modifiable. The SOS framework can be used as an important tool to prioritise future research and to develop policies to reduce sedentary time