Methods: The two-year longitudinal IDEFICS study included 2401 European children (aged 2.0–9.9) with complete information of the 16,229 participating at baseline. Sociodemographic variables, psychosocial factors and lifestyle were proxy-reported via questionnaires. Socioeconomically disadvantaged groups included children from families with low income, low education, migrant origin, unemployed parents, parents who lacked a social network, and from non-traditional families. MetS risk score was calculated as the sum of z-scores of waist circumference, blood pressure, lipids and insulin resistance. Linear mixed-effects models were used to study the association between social disadvantages and MetS risk. Models were adjusted for sex, age, well-being and lifestyle (fruit and vegetables consumption, physical activity, screen time).
Results: At both time points, children from low-income families (0.20 [0.03–0.37]); (β estimate and 99% confidence interval), children from non-traditional families (0.14 [0.02–0.26]), children whose parents were unemployed (0.31 [0.05–0.57]) and children who accumulated >3 disadvantages (0.21 [0.04–0.37]) showed a higher MetS score compared to non-socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.
Conclusion: Children from socioeconomically disadvantaged families are at high metabolic risk independently of diet, physical activity, sedentary behaviours and well-being. Interventions focusing on these socioeconomically disadvantaged groups should be developed to tackle health disparities.
Bibliographical notePublished online: 10. July 2018
- Metabolic syndrome
- Socioeconomic disadvantages
- Social vulnerabilities
- Lack of social support
- Family structure
- Socioeconomic status
- Modiﬁable lifestyle indicators