34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The impact of social deprivation on the response to a randomised controlled trial of a weight management intervention (BeWEL) for people at increased risk of colorectal cancer

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although 45% of colorectal cancer ( CRC) cases may be avoidable through appropriate lifestyle and weight management, health promotion interventions run the risk of widening health inequalities. The Be WEL randomised controlled trial assessed the impact of a diet and activity programme in overweight adults who were diagnosed with a colorectal adenoma, demonstrating a significantly greater weight loss at 12 months in intervention participants than in controls. The present study aimed to compare Be WEL intervention outcomes by participant deprivation status.

          Methods

          The intervention group of the Be WEL trial ( n = 163) was classified by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation ( SIMD) quintiles into ‘more deprived’ ( SIMD 1–2, n = 58) and ‘less deprived’ ( SIMD 3–5, n = 105). Socio‐economic and lifestyle variables were compared at baseline to identify potential challenges to intervention adherence in the more deprived. Between group differences at 12 months in primary outcome (change in body weight) and secondary outcomes (cardiovascular risk factors, diet, physical activity, knowledge of CRC risk and psychosocial variables) were assessed by deprivation status.

          Results

          At baseline, education ( P = 0.001), income ( P < 0.001), spending on physical activity ( P = 0.003) and success at previous weight loss attempts ( P = 0.007) were significantly lower in the most deprived. At 12 months, no between group differences by deprivation status were detected for changes in primary and main secondary outcomes.

          Conclusions

          Despite potential barriers faced by the more deprived participants, primary and most secondary outcomes were comparable between groups, indicating that this intervention is unlikely to worsen health inequalities and is equally effective across socio‐economic groups.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Socioeconomic differences in attitudes and beliefs about healthy lifestyles.

          s: The factors underlying socioeconomic status differences in smoking, leisure time physical activity, and dietary choice are poorly understood. This study investigated attitudes and beliefs that might underlie behavioural choices, including health locus of control, future salience, subjective life expectancy, and health consciousness, in a nationally representative sample. Data were collected as part of the monthly Omnibus survey of the Office of National Statistics in Britain. A stratified, probability sample of 2728 households was selected by random sampling of addresses. One adult from each household was interviewed. Higher SES respondents were less likely to smoke and more likely to exercise and eat fruit and vegetables daily. Lower SES was associated with less health consciousness (thinking about things to do to keep healthy), stronger beliefs in the influence of chance on health, less thinking about the future, and lower life expectancies. These attitudinal factors were in turn associated with unhealthy behavioural choices, independently of age, sex, and self rated health. Socioeconomic differences in healthy lifestyles are associated with differences in attitudes to health that may themselves arise through variations in life opportunities and exposure to material hardship and ill health over the life course.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Socio-economic status, dietary intake and 10 y trends: the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey.

            To study differences in dietary intake between adults with different socioeconomic status (SES) and trends over time. Cross-sectional study based on data of three Dutch National Food Consumption Surveys (DNFCS-1 1987/88; DNFCS-2 1992; DNFCS-3 1997/98), obtained from a panel by a stratified probability sample of the non-institutionalized Dutch population. A total of 6008 men and 6957 women aged 19 y and over. Dietary intake was assessed with a 2 day dietary record. Background information was obtained by structured questionnaire. Sociodemographic variables were available from panel information. SES, based on educational level, occupation and occupational position was categorized into (very) low, middle and high. Analysis of variance with age as covariable was used to explore the effects of SES on dietary intake and anthropometry. Statistical tests for trend were carried out with models in which week-weekend-day effects and an interaction term of time with SES were also included. The prevalence of obesity and skipping of breakfast was higher among people with a low SES. In all three surveys, subjects in the (very) low SES group reported having a higher consumption of potatoes, meat and meat products, visible fats, coffee and soft drinks (men only). Subjects with a high SES reported consuming more vegetables, cheese and alcohol. As regards nutrients, in all surveys a higher SES was associated with higher intake of vegetable protein, dietary fibre and most micronutrients. A higher SES was also associated with a lower fat intake but the differences between social classes were rather small and not consistent when the contribution of alcohol to energy intake was taken into account. In general, dietary intake among subjects in higher SES groups tended to be closer to the recommendations of the Netherlands Food and Nutrition Council and this phenomenon was quite stable over a period of 10 y.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dietary intervention in primary care: validity of the DINE method for diet assessment.

              Primary health care staff are involved increasingly in the provision of dietary advice for health promotion, often without adequate training in nutrition assessment or counselling. At present no brief diet assessment methods are available which have been validated for this purpose in the UK. We report on the accuracy of the Dietary Instrument for Nutrition Education (DINE) in classifying dietary fat and fibre intakes. This structured questionnaire can be administered and scored in under 10 minutes by primary care staff without specialized nutritional knowledge, and includes a dietary counselling component. The classification of fat and fibre intakes as low, medium or high by the DINE method was compared to that of a detailed 4-day diet record in a population of 206 factory workers. There was exact agreement of categorization for 53% of fat intakes and 52% of fibre intakes, and only 6% of fat intakes and 5% of fibre intakes were grossly misclassified (placed in a high category by one method and a low category by another). Pearson correlation coefficients between the two methods were 0.51 for fat, 0.46 for fibre and 0.43 for the polyunsaturated:saturated fat ratio. The DINE method is a brief and inexpensive tool for diet assessment in primary care health promotion programmes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                a.s.anderson@dundee.ac.uk
                Journal
                J Hum Nutr Diet
                J Hum Nutr Diet
                10.1111/(ISSN)1365-277X
                JHN
                Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0952-3871
                1365-277X
                23 November 2017
                June 2018
                : 31
                : 3 ( doiID: 10.1111/jhn.2018.31.issue-3 )
                : 306-313
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Division of Cancer Research Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening Ninewells Hospital & Medical School Dundee UK
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                A. S. Anderson, Centre for Research into Cancer Prevention and Screening, Cancer Division, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, DD1 9SY, UK.

                Tel: +44 (0)1382 383299

                E‐mail: a.s.anderson@ 123456dundee.ac.uk

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2047-1606
                Article
                JHN12524
                10.1111/jhn.12524
                6001549
                29171112
                99c7639f-7f01-4e60-b03c-9f4ea2b0d20d
                © 2017 The Authors. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Dietetic Association.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 4, Pages: 8, Words: 5426
                Funding
                Funded by: MRC National Prevention Research Initiative
                Award ID: G0802030
                Funded by: National Prevention Research Initiative
                Funded by: NHS Research Scotland
                Funded by: Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates
                Categories
                Weight Management
                Weight Management
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                jhn12524
                June 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.4.1.1 mode:remove_FC converted:14.06.2018

                Nutrition & Dietetics
                deprivation,screening,lifestyle,intervention,colorectal cancer
                Nutrition & Dietetics
                deprivation, screening, lifestyle, intervention, colorectal cancer

                Comments

                Comment on this article