Search

Background: Childhood overweight/obesity has been associated with environmental, parenting and socioeconomic status (SES) factors. This paper assesses the influence of the amount of green space, accessibility to a garden and neighbourhood condition on being overweight/obese. It investigates whether parental behaviours moderate or mediate this influence and evaluates the interaction of SES with environmental context., Methods: 6467 children from the UK Millennium Cohort Study living in England were analysed. We estimated logistic regressions to examine the initial association between environment and overweight. Subsequently, parenting determinants comprising: food consumption, physical activity, rules and regularity were evaluated as moderators or mediators. Lastly SES related variables were tested as moderators or mediators of the associations., Results: Statistically significant associations were found between low levels of green space, no access to a garden, run down area and childhood overweight/obesity [odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] respectively: 1.14 (1.02-1.27), 1.35 (1.16-1.58), 1.22 (1.05-1.42)]. None of the parental constructs mediated or moderated the relationships between environment and childhood overweight/obesity. Including SES, parental education moderated the effect of environmental context. Specifically, among lower educated households lack of garden access and less green space was associated with overweight/obesity; and among higher educated households poor neighbourhood condition influenced the probability of overweight/obesity respectively: 1.38 (1.12-1.70) OR 1.38, 95% CI (1.21-1.70)., Conclusions: This study suggests that limits on access to outdoor space are associated with future childhood overweight/obesity although the ways in which this occurs are moderated by parental education level., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI, 19 items) was developed to measure functional limitations, pain and appearance for patients with foot pain and is frequently used in both observational studies and randomised controlled trials. A Dutch version of the MFPDI was developed. The aims of this study were to evaluate all the measurement properties for the Dutch version of the MFPDI and to evaluate comparability to the original version., Method: The MFPDI was translated into Dutch using a forward/backward translation process. The dimensionality was evaluated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Measurement properties were evaluated per subscale according to the COSMIN taxonomy consisting of: reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error), validity (structural validity, content validity and cross-cultural validity comparing the Dutch version to the English version) responsiveness and interpretation., Results: The questionnaire consists of three scales, measuring foot function, foot pain and perception. The reliability of the foot function scale is acceptable (Cronbach's α > 0.7, ICC = 0.7, SEM = 2.2 on 0-18 scale). The construct validity of the function and pain scale was confirmed and only the pain scale contains one item with differential item functioning (DIF). The responsiveness of the function and pain scale is moderate when compared to anchor questions., Conclusion: Results using the Dutch MFPDI version can be compared to results using the original version. The foot function sub-scale (items 1-9) is a reliable and valid sub-scale. This study indicates that the use of the MFPDI as a longitudinal instrument might be problematic for measuring change in musculoskeletal foot pain due to moderate responsiveness.