Cited by 11Obesity, Physical Activity, DietObesity and Health PracticesNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Rural-urban differences in perceptions of child overweight among children and adolescents, their guardians and health care professionals in the United States.

Tarasenko, Yelena N., Chen, Chen, Smalley, K. Bryant, Warren, Jacob·2016·The Journal of Rural Health

Abstract

Research Objective: Children and adolescents residing in rural environments with higher prevalence of an overweight population may develop inaccurate perceptions of a healthy weight. This study examines rural‐urban differences in perceptions of child overweight among overweight (85 ≤ BMI percentile < 95) and obese children (BMI percentile ≥ 95), their guardians and health care providers (HCPs), and children's concomitant weight control. Methods: The cross‐sectional study was based on the 2005‐2010 NHANES data (1,844 overweight and obese children and adolescents, aged 8‐15 years). Rurality was defined using the 2003 RUCC. The weight status was based on the standardized measures of children's height and weight. Children reported whether they considered themselves overweight and whether they were trying to lose weight. Proxy respondents (ie, guardians) reported whether they considered their child to be overweight and whether an HCP had ever told them their child was overweight. Weighted percentages and predicted probabilities from multivariable logistic regressions were calculated, accounting for the complex, multistage, probability sampling design and nonresponse. Findings: Rural residents comprised 18.8% of the study population; 41.8% of them were overweight and 58.2% were obese compared to 46.7% and 53.3% of urban peers, respectively. Misperceptions of children's weight status were 11.3 and 6.0 percentage points higher in rural children and their guardians, respectively. Recall of an HCP identification of child overweight was 6.3 percentage points lower among rural versus urban guardians. Conclusion: Obesity prevention efforts may be fostered by improving accuracy of child overweight perceptions. This may be particularly impactful in rural settings, where weight misperceptions are high.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jrh.12135

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tarasenko, Y. N., Chen, C., Smalley, K. B., & Warren, J.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Southern University (US)
  • Mercer University (US)
Corresponding author
Tarasenko, Yelena N.
Venue
The Journal of Rural Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-08-12
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
63-71
ISSN
  • 0890-765X (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-0361
OpenAlex
W1482301344
Cited by
11
References
47
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Rural Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
childhood overweight, childhood obesity, weight misperception, urban-rural differences, rural health, children and adolescents, weight management, obesity prevention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Rural Population, Social Perception, Urban Population, Health Behavior, Logistic Models, Pediatric Obesity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review