Clusters of 24-hour movement behavior and diet and their relationship with health indicators among youth: a systematic review

Movement-related behaviors (physical activity [PA], sedentary behavior [SB], and sleep) and diet interact with each other and play important roles in health indicators in youth. This systematic review aimed to investigate how PA, SB, sleep, and diet cluster in youth by biological sex; and to examine which cluster are associated with health indicators. This study was registered in PROSPERO (number: CRD42018094826). Five electronic databases were assessed. Eligibility criteria allowed studies that included youth (aged 19 years and younger), and only the four behaviors {PA, SB, sleep, and diet (ultra-processed foods [UPF]; fruits and vegetables [FV])} analyzed by applying data-based cluster procedures. From 12,719 articles screened; 23 were included. Of these, four investigated children, and ten identified clusters by biological sex. Sixty-six mixed cluster were identified including, 34 in mixed-sex samples, 10 in boys and 11 in girls. The most frequent clusters in mixed-sex samples were "High SB UPF Low Sleep", "Low PA High SB Satisfactory Sleep", and "High PA". The main difference in profiles according to sex was that girls' clusters were characterized by high sleep duration, whereas boys' clusters by high PA. There were a few associations found between cluster types and health indicators, highlighting that youth assigned to cluster types with low PA exhibited higher adiposity. In conclusion, the youth presented a range of clusters of behaviors, typically exhibiting at least one unhealthy behavior. Similar patterns were observed in both sexes with the biggest difference in time of sleep for girls and PA for boys. These findings underscore the importance of intervention strategies targeting multiple behaviors simultaneously to enhance health risk profiles and indicators in children and adolescents.

COVID-19 on Food Insecurity in Hispanic/Latino Essential and Non-essential Workers

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic's economic fallout has further exacerbated the health and well-being among Hispanics/Latinos, who maybe overrepresented in essential job industries and are vulnerable to experiencing food insecurity. This study explores whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected food security status differently among Latino/Hispanic essential and non-essential workers in the United States.

METHODS

The COVID-19 Latino health cross-sectional survey was conducted and administered in person and virtually. Bivariate analyses and chi-square tests were performed to investigate the association between essential worker status and changes in food security status during the COVID-19 pandemic. All reported p-values were two-sided; p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of the 869 Hispanic/Latino respondents, 393 (45%) were deemed essential workers, and 476 (55%) were non-essential workers. About 22% of essential workers reported a household income of less than $20,000, whereas 19% of non-essential workers had an income above $100,000. Half (54%) of essential workers reported food insecurity. Over one-third (35%) of essential and 22% of non-essential workers reported increased food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, there was a significant difference in food insecurity status between essential and non-essential Hispanic/Latino workers (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The results underscore the prevalence of food insecurity due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the need to create comprehensive food policies that address the lack of availability of adequate food among Hispanic/Latino essential workers who already face pandemic-related challenges.

Investigation of Risk Of Bias due to Unreported and SelecTively included results in meta-analyses of nutrition research: the ROBUST study protocol

Background: Dietary guidelines should be informed by systematic reviews (SRs) of the available scientific evidence. However, if the SRs that underpin dietary guidelines are flawed in their design, conduct or reporting, the recommendations contained therein may be misleading or harmful. To date there has been little empirical investigation of bias due to selective inclusion of results, and bias due to missing results, in SRs of food/diet-outcome relationships. Objectives: To explore in SRs with meta-analyses of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes: (i) whether systematic reviewers selectively included study effect estimates in meta-analyses when multiple effect estimates were available; (ii) what impact selective inclusion of study effect estimates may have on meta-analytic effects, and; (iii) the risk of bias due to missing results (publication bias and selective non-reporting bias) in meta-analyses. Methods: We will systematically search for SRs with meta-analysis of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes in a generally healthy population, published between January 2018 and June 2019. We will randomly sort titles and abstracts and screen them until we identify 50 eligible SRs. The first reported meta-analysis of a binary or continuous outcome in each SR (the 'index meta-analysis') will be evaluated. We will extract from study reports all study effect estimates that were eligible for inclusion in the index meta-analyses (e.g. from multiple instruments and time points) and will quantify and test for evidence of selective inclusion of results. We will also assess the risk of bias due to missing results in the index meta-analyses using a new tool (ROB-ME). Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval is not required because information will only be extracted from published studies. Dissemination of the results will be through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences. We will make all data collected from this study publicly available via the Open Science Framework.

Investigation of Risk Of Bias due to Unreported and SelecTively included results in meta-analyses of nutrition research: the ROBUST study protocol

Background: Dietary guidelines should be informed by systematic reviews (SRs) of the available scientific evidence. However, if the SRs that underpin dietary guidelines are flawed in their design, conduct or reporting, the recommendations contained therein may be misleading or harmful. To date there has been little empirical investigation of bias due to selective inclusion of results, and bias due to missing results, in SRs of food/diet-outcome relationships. Objectives: To explore in SRs with meta-analyses of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes: (i) whether systematic reviewers selectively included study effect estimates in meta-analyses when multiple effect estimates were available; (ii) what impact selective inclusion of study effect estimates may have on meta-analytic effects, and; (iii) the risk of bias due to missing results (publication bias and selective non-reporting bias) in meta-analyses. Methods: We will systematically search for SRs with meta-analysis of the association between food/diet and health-related outcomes in a generally healthy population, published between January 2018 and June 2019. We will randomly sort titles and abstracts and screen them until we identify 50 eligible SRs. The first reported meta-analysis of a binary or continuous outcome in each SR (the 'index meta-analysis') will be evaluated. We will extract from study reports all study effect estimates that were eligible for inclusion in the index meta-analyses (e.g. from multiple instruments and time points) and will quantify and test for evidence of selective inclusion of results. We will also assess the risk of bias due to missing results in the index meta-analyses using a new tool (ROB-ME). Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval is not required because information will only be extracted from published studies. Dissemination of the results will be through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences. We will make all data collected from this study publicly available via the Open Science Framework.

Soda Taxes: The Importance of Analysing Policy Processes Comment on "The Untapped Power of Soda Taxes: Incentivising Consumers, Generating Revenue, and Altering Corporate Behaviours"

Sarah A. Roache and Lawrence O. Gostin’s recent editorial comprehensively presents soda taxation rationales from a public health perspective. While we essentially agree that soda taxes are gaining momentum, this commentary expands upon the need for a better understanding of the policy processes underlying their development and implementation. Indeed, the umbrella concept of soda taxation actually covers a diversity of objectives and mechanisms, which may not only condition the feasibility and acceptability of a proposal, but also alter its impact. We briefly highlight some conditions that may have influenced soda tax policy processes and why further theory-driven case studies may be instructive.