Union transitions and changes in BMI among adults in Mexico.

Department of Sociology,The Ohio State University, 1885 Neil Ave. Mall, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior (Impact Factor: 2.72). 06/2012; 53(2):263-75. DOI: 10.1177/0022146512445898
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study utilizes nationally representative, longitudinal data from the Mexico Family Life Survey to examine the associations between union transitions and changes in body mass index (BMI) among adults in Mexico. Results from change score regression models (N = 11,339) indicate larger BMI gains for those entering a union than for those remaining single, net of baseline weight status and socioeconomic controls. Further, a significant moderating effect of baseline weight status suggests that overweight individuals entering a union gain almost two BMI points more than overweight single individuals during this three-year period. Individuals experiencing a union dissolution gain less BMI than those entering a union, but are predicted to lose BMI (as found in the United States) only if they are overweight before the transition.

Download full-text


Available from: Kammi K Schmeer, Jun 04, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To develop an internationally acceptable definition of child overweight and obesity, specifying the measurement, the reference population, and the age and sex specific cut off points. International survey of six large nationally representative cross sectional growth studies. Brazil, Great Britain, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, Singapore, and the United States. 97 876 males and 94 851 females from birth to 25 years of age. Body mass index (weight/height(2)). For each of the surveys, centile curves were drawn that at age 18 years passed through the widely used cut off points of 25 and 30 kg/m(2) for adult overweight and obesity. The resulting curves were averaged to provide age and sex specific cut off points from 2-18 years. The proposed cut off points, which are less arbitrary and more internationally based than current alternatives, should help to provide internationally comparable prevalence rates of overweight and obesity in children.
    BMJ Clinical Research 06/2000; 320(7244):1240-3. · 14.09 Impact Factor
  • Demography 12/1995; 32(4):483-507. DOI:10.2307/2061670 · 1.93 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BMI is highly correlated between spouses; however, less is understood about the underlying mechanism(s) by which the development of obesity in one individual increases the risk of obesity in his/her spouse. The objective of this study is to investigate whether romantic partnership and duration of cohabitation are related to incident obesity and obesity-promoting behaviors. We used two data sets from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health: (i) 6,949 US adolescents (wave II, 1996) followed into adulthood (wave III, 2001-2002) and (ii) 1,293 dating, cohabiting, and married romantic couples from wave III, including measured anthropometry and self-report behavior data. In the longitudinal cohort, we used sex-stratified logistic regression models to examine the risk of incident obesity by longitudinal romantic relationship status and duration of time spent living with a romantic partner. In the Couples Sample, we used multinomial logistic regression to predict concordance in outcomes: obesity, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, and screen time by romantic partnership and duration of time living with a romantic partner. Individuals who transitioned from single/dating to cohabiting or married were more likely to become obese than those who were dating at both waves. Partner concordance for negative, obesity-related behaviors was strongest for married couples and couples who lived together > or =2 years. The shared household environment may increase the likelihood of becoming obese, influence partner concordance, and may be an important target for obesity intervention.
    Obesity 05/2009; 17(7):1441-7. DOI:10.1038/oby.2009.97 · 4.39 Impact Factor
Show more