Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Obes Rev. 2015 Dec;16 Suppl 2:119-26. doi: 10.1111/obr.12326.

Differential outcome of the IDEFICS intervention in overweight versus non-overweight children: did we achieve 'primary' or 'secondary' prevention?

Author information

1
Section for Epidemiology and Social Medicine (EPSO), Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
2
Department of Public Health, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.
3
Research Centre, National Institute for Health Development, Tallinn, Estonia.
4
Department of Pediatrics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
5
Department of Paediatrics, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
6
GENUD (Growth, Exercise, Nutrition, and Development) Research Group, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain.
7
Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS, Bremen, Germany.
8
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
9
Epidemiology & Population Genetics, Institute of Food Sciences, CNR, Avellino, Italy.
10
Research and Education Institute of Child Health, Strovolos, Cyprus.
11
Department of Politics, Philosophy & Religion, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The aim of this study was to explore whether the IDEFICS intervention had a differential effect on 11,041 children's weight trajectories depending on their baseline body mass index status.

METHODS:

Two subgroups of children are considered in the present analysis: those who were overweight or obese prior to the intervention and those who were neither overweight nor obese.

RESULTS:

Among children in all eight countries who did not have prevalent overweight or obesity (OWOB) at baseline, 2 years later, there was no significant difference between intervention and control groups in risk of having developed OWOB. However, we observed a strong regional heterogeneity, which could be attributed to the presence of one distinctly outlying country, Belgium, where the intervention group had increased risk for becoming overweight. In contrast, among the sample of children with prevalent OWOB at baseline, we observed a significantly greater probability of normalized weight status after 2 years. In other words, a protective effect against persistent OWOB was observed in children in intervention regions compared with controls, which corresponded to an adjusted odds ratio of 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.58, 0.98).

DISCUSSION:

This analysis thus provided evidence of a differential effect of the IDEFICS intervention, in which children with overweight may have benefited without having been specifically targeted. However, no overall primary preventive effect could be observed in children without initial overweight or obesity.

KEYWORDS:

Childhood obesity; intervention; primary prevention; secondary prevention

PMID:
26707021
DOI:
10.1111/obr.12326
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center