National Academies Press: OpenBook

Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress (2013)

Chapter: Appendix E: Disparities Tables

« Previous: Appendix D: Table of Indicator Data Sources
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

E

Disparities Tables1

The following summarizes the findings for the number of tools and methods identified by population of risk or social influence by each of the five environments in the National Collaborative on Childhood Obesity Research Registry (NCCOR-R).

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ENVIRONMENT

NCCOR-R housed N=290 tools and methods of the physical activity environment at the time of this review. After applying exclusionary criteria,2 removing duplicate tools and methods relevant to other target environments, and assessing populations at risk, the Committee identified 65 tools and methods (see Table E-1). About half of the tools and methods (N=36) were focused at the community level, and the rest were individual level (N=29). Four tools and methods were designed for populations at risk for disparities, specifically African Americans (N=1), Hispanics (N=2), and American Indian and Alaskan Natives (N=1). None of the tools or methods were designed specifically for Asian or Hawaiian or Pacific Islanders. One measurement tool targeted multiple populations at risk for disparities, and the remaining 60 tools and methods related to physical activity environment were inclusive of majority white and various other multiethnic populations at risk for disparities. Six tools and methods specifically targeted females, and none addressed only males. For 12 tools and methods, the database included no information on sex specificity, and the remaining tools and methods cited use with both males and females (N=47). Of the 46 tools and methods identifying geographic location, none were specific to rural settings; instead the majority cited use in urban settings (N=37) or both urban and rural settings (N=10). Disability was the focus of only one measurement tool or method (Spivock et al., 2007); sexual identity was not cited as a reported focus of any tools and methods.

A majority of tools and methods included variables that address living and working conditions (N=55) generally defined by aspects of the built environment, access, and availability to safe places to be

_____________

1 This summary does not include references. Citations to support statements made herein are given in the body of the report.

2 Exclusionary criteria for identifying tools and methods within NCCOR-R targeting populations with health disparities included individual tools and methods of dietary intake or physical activity (e.g., 24-hour dietary recalls, food frequency tools and methods, or actigraph), and surveillance tools and methods because Accelerating Progress in Obesity Prevention report (IOM, 2012) recommendations focus on environmental and policy changes.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

active, and other environmental aesthetics. Sociocultural influences were primarily designated as study covariates. Socioeconomic influences identified in NCCOR-R included covariates including races and socioeconomic status (SES) for N=38, and relevant variables of interest; instead relevant variables of interest; were frequently included as covariates in studies using the target tools and methods (N=55). Wolch and colleagues (2011) reported the only tool or method that captured any length of exposure to disadvantaged conditions addressed a time frame of 8 years.

A majority of the tools and methods reviewed use interviews, surveys, or questionnaires, either investigator- or self-administered (N=40). Observational instruments were less common (N=7), and only Davison (2011) and Israel et al. (2006) used focus group methods. The use of geographic information system (GIS) methods accounted for N=21 cited tools and methods. Of the 58 tools and methods reporting sample size, N=8 cited use with fewer than 100 subjects, N=19 cited use with 100 to 500 subjects, and N=31 cited use with greater than 500 subjects. Finally, psychometric properties of either reliability or validity were not reported for 22 of the 65 tools and methods. Of those with reported psychometric data, N=18 reported both reliability and validity, N=9 reported only reliability, and N=16 reported only validity. Of the N=27 tools and methods for which some form of reliability was reported, methods included test-retest (N=17), internal consistency (N=8), inter-rater reliability (N=6), and inter-instrumentation (N=1). Validity3 was reported for 31 tools and methods and included construct validity (N=13 tools and methods), concurrent (N=7), criterion (N=8), predictive (N=5), content (N=1), convergent (N=1), discriminant (N=1), and face validity (N=1 each).

FOOD AND BEVERAGE ENVIRONMENT

A search of the food environment in NCCOR-R yielded 283 tools and methods. After applying exclusionary criteria, removing duplicate tools and methods relevant to other target environments, and assessing populations at risk, the Committee identified 51 tools and methods for inclusion in Table E-2. More than two-thirds (N=34) are focused at the community level, and one-third are at the individual level (N=17). Fourteen tools and methods were designed specifically for populations at risk for disparities, with 13 focused on African Americans and 1 focused on Hispanics. Two tools and methods were multiethnic (e.g., addressed both African American and Hispanics), while 31 tools and methods were for whites along with multiple other populations at risk. Among tools and methods specific to sex, four were used specifically with females, while one tool or method was used with only males. Fourteen tools and methods cited use with both male and female populations, while 32 tools and methods did not specify sex. Of the 38 tools and methods identifying geographic focus, only one specified use with a rural setting, while the majority (N=30) were used in urban settings. Seven tools and methods cited use in both rural and urban locations. There were no tools and methods designed for populations with disabilities or sexual identity/ preference.

This review of dimensions of disparities revealed that 47 tools and methods included variables relevant to living and working conditions and measuring their access to and availability of foods and quality of foods. Sociocultural influences were included in 2 measurement tools or research methodology, while socioeconomic influences were described in 12 tools and methods. Sociocultural covariates were described

_____________

3 Definitions for the various types of validity can be located at http://nccor.org/downloads/NCCOR%20MPR%20Report%20Final.pdf (accessed November 12, 2013).

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

in N=7 while socioeconomic covariates were described in N=29. N=41 studies listed socioeconomic related variables. Tools and methods of life course exposure were not included.

The majority of tools and methods were interviews, surveys, or questionnaires, either administered by researchers or self-administered (N=28); few observational instruments (N=5) and focus group methods (N=4) were used. The use of GIS methods accounted for N=10 cited tools and methods. Of the 39 tools and methods reporting sample size, N=4 cited use with fewer than 100 subjects, N=22 were used with 100 to 500 subjects, and N=13 were used for greater than 500 subjects. Of the 51 tools and methods related to food and beverage environment in NCCOR-R, 33 did not include psychometric properties. Of those reporting psychometric properties of data generated by the tool or method, N=9 reported findings for both reliability and validity, N=8 reported only reliability, and 1 cited only tools and methods of validity. Of the tools and methods in which some form of reliability was reported, methods included test-retest (N=7), internal consistency (N=9), and inter-rater reliability (N=8). Types of validity testing included construct validity (N=6), and one each for criterion (N=1), predictive (N=1), convergent (N=1), and face validity (N=1).

MESSAGE ENVIRONMENT

A search of NCCOR-R for media and message environment produced 95 tools and methods. After applying exclusionary criteria, removing duplicate tools and methods, and targeting the search toward populations of interest, the Committee included 8 tools and methods in Table E-3. Of these, five were focused at the community level and three at the individual level. Four tools and methods were designed specifically for populations at risk for disparities, including three focused on African Americans and one on Hispanics. The remaining three tools and methods were designed for the majority white population but also included specific ethnic populations at risk for disparities; one tool/method did not report ethnicity. All 8 tools and methods were used with urban populations. None of the tools or methods were focused on sex, persons with disabilities, or sexual identity. Six tools and methods addressed living and working conditions. Ayala and colleagues (2007) described the only tool or method to include sociocultural content related to eating and socioeconomic content related to purchasing. None of the tools and methods addressed duration or intensity of exposure to media.

Interviews, surveys, or questionnaires, either administered by researchers or self-administered, accounted for seven tools and methods; one instrument was observational. All tools and methods reported sample size: N=2 tool/method was used with fewer than 100 subjects, N=3 with 100 to 500 subjects, and N=3 tools and methods were used with more than 500 subjects. Psychometric properties of reliability or validity were not available through NCCOR-R for three of the eight tools and methods. Of those reporting psychometric data, two reported findings for both reliability and validity, and three reported only reliability. Reliability methods included test-retest (N=2), internal consistency (N=1), and inter-rater reliability (N=2). Criterion validity was reported on two tools and methods. No other validity information was provided.

HEALTH CARE/WORKSITE ENVIRONMENT

NCCOR-R contained 14 tools and methods regarding the health care/worksite environment. After applying exclusionary criteria, removing duplicate tools and methods, and targeting the search toward populations of interest, the Committee included only two tools and methods in Table E-4. None of these

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

tools and methods were designed specifically for populations at risk for disparities. One tool/method was focused at the community level, and one at the individual level. Both addressed urban settings. Neither addressed specific populations related to sex, disability, or sexual identity. A review of tools and methods targeting or addressing dimensions of disparities revealed that both tools and methods addressed living and working conditions; variables of sociocultural or socioeconomic influence or life course exposure were not described. One tool/method was a telephone survey; the other was a self-administered questionnaire. One tool/method reported use with a sample size of fewer than 100 subjects; one was used with greater than 500 subjects. Psychometric qualities were not reported for either tool or method.

SCHOOL AND CHILD CARE ENVIRONMENT

NCCOR-R yielded 364 tools and methods of school and early child care environments. After applying exclusionary criteria, removing duplicate tools and methods relevant to other target environments, and assessing by populations at risk, the Committee identified 48 tools and methods for inclusion in Table E-5. Of these, N=38 reflected the individual level, N=3 organizational, N=5 community, and N=2 policy level. Twenty-one tools and methods were designed specifically for populations at risk for disparities, all of which were derived from one study (The Minnesota Girls’ Health Enrichment Multi-Site Studies [GEMS] pilot study) that focused on African American girls (Story et al., 2003). Two tools and methods addressed American Indians, and two were developed for Asian Americans, and one addressed both the African American and Hispanic populations. No other tools and methods were identified as targeting any other populations at risk for disparities. Twenty-one of the tools and methods described were populationwide, addressing multiple ethnic minorities and the majority white population. In addition to the GEMS tools and methods (N=21), 3 studies focused only on women or girls; 14 were used with populations of males and females. With regard to geographic focus, 16 tools and methods cited use with urban populations; none included use with rural or combined rural and urban populations. None of the tools and methods specifically addressed sexual identity or disabilities associated with the school and child care environment.

Variables reflecting living and working conditions were included in 39 tools and methods (of which 21 were from the GEMS study). Sociocultural variables were included in three tools and methods plus GEMS, while socioeconomic variables were not included in any tools and methods. As noted in previous environments, variables of interest were again described as covariates in studies that used the target tools and methods (sociocultural N=27, socioeconomic N=15). N=21 plus GEMS studies included socioeconomic-related variables. None of the tools and methods addressed length of exposure to disadvantaged conditions.

Interviews, surveys, or questionnaires, either administered by researchers or self-administered, accounted for N=43 tools and methods (including all GEMS tools and methods), while two instruments were observational. Three tools and methods used GIS methods. Of the tools and methods reporting sample size, N=7 tools and methods plus GEMS were used with less than 100 subjects, N=7 were used for 100 to 500 subjects, and N=9 included more than 500 subjects. Psychometric properties of reliability or validity were not available for 14 tools and methods. Of those reporting psychometric data, 4 reported findings for both reliability and validity, N=7 + 21 GEMS reported only reliability, and N=3 cited validity only. Of the tools and methods in which some form of reliability was reported, methods included

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

test-retest (N=5), internal consistency (N=2 + 21 GEMS), and inter-rater reliability (N=4). Validity was reported as follows: face validity (N=1), constructive (N=1), concurrent (N=2), criterion (N=3), content (N=1), and predictive (N=2).

OTHER LIMITATIONS

Chapter 5 and this Appendix focus only on tools and methods available in the NCCOR-R and did not secure tools and methods located outside of NCCOR-R or in other tools and research methods databases. This review did not attempt to assess the tools and methods of the monitoring of implementation or quality of interventions as applied to cultural sensitivity on the part of organizations and practitioners. As mentioned previously, no other databases focus on measuring obesity and related environments, programs, and systems and provide a good opportunity to compile existing tools and methods that could be used to assess progress with particular attention to disparities. In addition, NCCOR-R is an active database with tools and methods added on a continuing basis. Therefore, relevant tools and methods entered into NCCOR-R after the review may not have been captured. The search was conducted using multiple key terms and words as descriptors of targeted populations at risk and social influence. Although this was a comprehensive strategy, it is possible that the key terms did not identify all possible tools and methods. A detailed review of all of the content of NCCOR-R tools and methods was beyond the scope of this review. The review relied on the descriptive data provided by NCCOR-R and expert interpretation of these data to categorize the instruments. In doing so, potential inconsistencies in how constructs of interest were defined, inaccuracy in categorizing tools and methods, or omission of critical variables of interest could have crept into this report. NCCOR-R was designed to house tools and methods particularly relevant to childhood obesity, which may limit inclusion of relevant tools and methods beyond youth; however, many food and physical activity environmental tools and methods identified are not age-specific and were therefore included and apply to the adult population. This likely limited the library of tools and methods included in the worksite/health care environment. Despite these limitations, it is noteworthy that at the time of this review, 17 percent of the NCCOR-R tools and methods were for children ages 2-5 years, whereas 19 percent were for use only with adults. Finally, this review focused on the availability of tools and methods of disparity and equity, and not on factors defining their use, scale of measurement (absolute versus ratio), or interpretation. Measurement of health disparities and equity have additional implications for assessing indicators of health and social advantage/disadvantage and for comparing indicators across social strata (Braveman, 2012; Woolf and Braveman, 2011). These are conceptual and methodological issues that require careful consideration, are the subject of other reviews (Braveman, 2009), and will have some consideration in other chapters (Chapters 6, 7, and 8).

REFERENCES

Abarca, J., and S. Ramachandran. 2005. Using community indicators to assess nutrition in Arizona-Mexico border communities. Preventing Chronic Disease 2(1):A06.

Adams, A., and R. Prince. 2010. Correlates of physical activity in young American Indian children: Lessons learned from the Wisconsin Nutrition and Growth Study. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice 16(5):394-400.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Adams, J., E. Ganiti, and M. White. 2011. Socio-economic differences in outdoor food advertising in a city in Northern England. Public Health Nutrition 14(6):945-950.

Alfonzo, M., M. G. Boarnet, K. Day, T. Mcmillan, and C. L. Anderson. 2008. The relationship of neighbourhood build environment features and adult parent’s walking. Journal of Urban Design 13(1):29-51.

Algert, S. J., A. Agrawal, and D. S. Lewis. 2006. Disparities in access to fresh produce in low-income neighborhoods in Los Angeles. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 30(5):365-370.

Andresen, E. M., T. K. Malmstrom, F. D. Wolinsky, M. Schootman, J. P. Miller, and D. K. Miller. 2008. Rating neighborhoods for older adult health: Results from the African American health study. BMC Public Health 8:35.

Andrews, M., L. Kantor,M. Lino, and D. Ripplinger, D. 2001. Using USDA’s thrifty food plan to assess food availability and affordability Food Review 24(2):45.

Apparicio, P., M. S. Cloutier, and R. Shearmur. 2007. The case of Montreal’s missing food deserts: Evaluation of accessibility to food supermarkets. International Journal of Health Geographics 6:4.

Arcan, C., M. Y. Kubik, J. A. Fulkerson, C. Davey, and M. Story. 2011. Association between food opportunities during the school day and selected dietary behaviors of alternative high school students, Minneapolis/Saint Paul, Minnesota, 2006. Preventing Chronic Disease 8(1):A08.

Atkinson, J. L., J. F. Sallis, B. E. Saelens, K. L. Cain, and J. B. Black. 2005. The association of neighborhood design and recreational environments with physical activity. American Journal of Health Promotion 19(4):304-309.

Ayala, G. X., B. Baquero, E. M. Arredondo, N. Campbell, S. Larios, and J. P. Elder. 2007. Association between family variables and Mexican American children’s dietary behaviors. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 39(2):62-69.

Ball, K., D. Crawford, and G. Mishra. 2006. Socio-economic inequalities in women’s fruit and vegetable intakes: A multilevel study of individual, social and environmental mediators. Public Health Nutrition 9(5):623-630.

Baranowski, T., M. Missaghian, A. Broadfoot, K. Watson, K. Cullen, T. Nicklas, J. Fisher, J. Baranowski, and S. O’Donnell. 2006. Fruit and vegetable shopping practices and social support scales: A validation. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 38(6):340-351.

Baranowski, T., K. Watson, M. Missaghian, A. Broadfoot, J. Baranowski, K. Cullen, T. Nicklas, J. Fisher, and S. O’Donnell. 2007. Parent outcome expectancies for purchasing fruit and vegetables: A validation. Public Health Nutrition 10(3):280-291.

Baranowski, T., K. Watson, M. Missaghian, A. Broadfoot, K. Cullen, T. Nicklas, J. Fisher, J. Baranowski, and S. O’Donnell. 2008. Social support is a primary influence on home fruit, 100% juice, and vegetable availability. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 108(7):1231-1235.

Bauer, K. W., D. Neumark-Sztainer, J. A. Fulkerson, P. J. Hannan, and M. Story. 2011. Familial correlates of adolescent girls’ physical activity, television use, dietary intake, weight, and body composition. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 8:25.

Befort, C., H. Kaur, N. Nollen, D. K. Sullivan, N. Nazir, W. S. Choi, L. Hornberger, and J. S. Ahluwalia. 2006. Fruit, vegetable, and fat intake among non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white adolescents: Associations with home availability and food consumption settings. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 106(3):367-373.

Benjamin, S. E., B. Neelon, S. C. Ball, S. I. Bangdiwala, A. S. Ammerman, and D. S. Ward. 2007. Reliability and validity of a nutrition and physical activity environmental self-assessment for child care. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 4:29.

Berkey, C. S., H. R. Rockett, A. E. Field, M. W. Gillman, A. L. Frazier, C. A. Camargo, Jr., and G. A. Colditz. 2000. Activity, dietary intake, and weight changes in a longitudinal study of preadolescent and adolescent boys and girls. Pediatrics 105(4):E56.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Block, D., and J. Kouba. 2006. A comparison of the availability and affordability of a market basket in two communities in the Chicago area. Public Health Nutrition 9(7):837-845.

Block, J. P., R. A. Scribner, and K. B. DeSalvo. 2004. Fast food, race/ethnicity, and income: A geographic analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 27(3):211-217.

Boles, R. E., T. D. Nelson, L. A. Chamberlin, J. M. Valenzuela, S. N. Sherman, S. L. Johnson, and S. W. Powers. 2010. Confirmatory factor analysis of the child feeding questionnaire among low-income African American families of preschool children. Appetite 54(2):402-405.

Braveman, P. 2009. A health disparities perspective on obesity research. Preventing Chronic Disease 6(3):A91.

Braveman, P. 2012. Health inequalities by class and race in the US: What can we learn from the patterns? Social Science and Medicine 74(5):665-667.

Braza, M., W. Shoemaker, and A. Seeley. 2004. Neighborhood design and rates of walking and biking to elementary school in 34 California communities. American Journal of Health Promotion 19(2):128-136.

Brownson, R. C., J. J. Chang, A. A. Eyler, B. E. Ainsworth, K. A. Kirtland, B. E. Saelens, and J. F. Sallis. 2004. Measuring the environment for friendliness toward physical activity: A comparison of the reliability of 3 questionnaires. American Journal of Public Health 94(3):473-483.

Bryant, M. J., D. S. Ward, D. Hales, A. Vaughn, R. G. Tabak, and J. Stevens. 2008. Reliability and validity of the healthy home survey: A tool to measure factors within homes hypothesized to relate to overweight in children. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 5:23.

Burdette, H. L., and R. C. Whitaker. 2004. Neighborhood playgrounds, fast food restaurants, and crime: Relationships to overweight in low-income preschool children. Preventive Medicine 38(1):57-63.

Burdette, H. L., R. C. Whitaker, and S. R. Daniels. 2004. Parental report of outdoor playtime as a measure of physical activity in preschool-aged children. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 158(4):353-357.

Cassady, D., R. Housemann, and C. Dagher. 2004. Measuring cues for healthy choices on restaurant menus: Development and testing of a measurement instrument. American Journal of Health Promotion 18(6):444-449.

Catlin, T. K., E. J. Simoes, and R. C. Brownson. 2003. Environmental and policy factors associated with overweight among adults in Missouri. American Journal of Health Promotion 17(4):249-258.

Caughy, M. O., P. J. O’Campo, and J. Patterson. 2001. A brief observational measure for urban neighborhoods. Health Place 7(3):225-236.

Cerin, E., T. L. Conway, B. E. Saelens, L. D. Frank, and J. F. Sallis. 2009. Cross-validation of the factorial structure of the Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) and its abbreviated form (NEWS-A). International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 6:32.

Chen, X., M. Sekine, S. Hamanishi, H. Wang, Y. Hayashikawa, T. Yamagami, and S. Kagamimori. 2002. The validity of nursery teachers’ report on the physical activity of young children. Journal of Epidemiology 12(5):367-374.

Chiang, P. H., M. L. Wahlqvist, M. S. Lee, L. Y. Huang, H. H. Chen, and S. T. Huang. 2011. Fast-food outlets and walkability in school neighbourhoods predict fatness in boys and height in girls: A Taiwanese population study. Public Health Nutrition 14(9):1601-1609.

Crawford, P. B., W. Gosliner, P. Strode, S. E. Samuels, C. Burnett, L. Craypo, and A. K. Yancey. 2004. Walking the talk: Fit WIC wellness programs improve self-efficacy in pediatric obesity prevention counseling. American Journal of Public Health 94(9):1480-1485.

Cullen, K. W., and D. I. Thompson. 2005. Texas school food policy changes related to middle school a la carte/snack bar foods: Potential savings in kilocalories. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 105(12):1952-1954.

Cullen, K. W., and K. B. Watson. 2009. The impact of the Texas public school nutrition policy on student food selection and sales in Texas. American Journal of Public Health 99(4):706-712.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Cullen, K. W., T. Baranowski, E. Owens, T. Marsh, L. Rittenberry, and C. de Moor. 2003. Availability, accessibility, and preferences for fruit, 100% fruit juice, and vegetables influence children’s dietary behavior. Health Education and Behavior 30(5):615-626.

Davison, K. K., K. Li, M. L. Baskin, T. Cox, and O. Affuso. 2011. Measuring parental support for children’s physical activity in white and African American parents: The activity support scale for multiple groups (ACTS-MG). Preventive Medicine 52(1):39-43.

Dennisuk, L. A., A. J. Coutinho, S. Suratkar, P. J. Surkan, K. Christiansen, M. Riley, J. A. Anliker, S. Sharma, and J. Gittelsohn. 2011. Food expenditures and food purchasing among low-income, urban, African-American youth. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 40(6):625-628.

DeVault, N., T. Kennedy, J. Hermann, M. Mwavita, P. Rask, and A. Jaworsky. 2009. It’s all about kids: Preventing overweight in elementary school children in Tulsa, OK. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 109(4):680-687.

Diez Roux, A. V., K. R. Evenson, A. P. McGinn, D. G. Brown, L. Moore, S. Brines, and D. R. Jacobs, Jr. 2007. Availability of recreational resources and physical activity in adults. American Journal of Public Health 97(3):493-499.

Ding, D., J. F. Sallis, G. J. Norman, B. E. Saelens, S. K. Harris, J. Kerr, D. Rosenberg, N. Durant, and K. Glanz. 2012. Community food environment, home food environment, and fruit and vegetable intake of children and adolescents. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 44(6):634-638.

Donkin, A. J., E. A. Dowler, S. J. Stevenson, and S. A. Turner. 2000. Mapping access to food in a deprived area: The development of price and availability indices. Public Health Nutrition 3(1):31-38.

Doyle, S., A. Kelly-Schwartz, M. Schlossberg, and J. Stockard. 2006. Active community environments and health: The relationship of walkable and safe communities to individual health. Journal of the American Planning Association 72(1):19-31.

Dunton, G. F., and M. Schneider. 2006. Perceived barriers to walking for physical activity. Preventing Chronic Disease 3(4):A116.

Echeverria, S. E., A. V. Diez-Roux, and B. G. Link. 2004. Reliability of self-reported neighborhood characteristics. Journal of Urban Health 81(4):682-701.

Economos, C. D., J. M. Sacheck, K. Kwan Ho Chui, L. Irizarry, J. Guillemont, J. J. Collins, and R. R. Hyatt. 2008. School-based behavioral assessment tools are reliable and valid for measurement of fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity, and television viewing in young children. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 108(4):695-701.

Edmonds, J., T. Baranowski, J. Baranowski, K. W. Cullen, and D. Myres. 2001. Ecological and socioeconomic correlates of fruit, juice, and vegetable consumption among African-American boys. Preventive Medicine 32(6):476-481.

Epstein, L. H., S. Raja, S. S. Gold, R. A. Paluch, Y. Pak, and J. N. Roemmich. 2006. Reducing sedentary behavior: The relationship between park area and the physical activity of youth. Psychological Science 17(8):654-659.

Evenson, K. R., and A. P. McGinn. 2005. Test-retest reliability of a questionnaire to assess physical environmental factors pertaining to physical activity. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2:7.

Evenson, K. R., A. A. Eyler, S. Wilcox, J. L. Thompson, and J. E. Burke. 2003. Test-retest reliability of a questionnaire on physical activity and its correlates among women from diverse racial and ethnic groups. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 25(3 Suppl 1):15-22.

Evenson, K. R., A. S. Birnbaum, A. L. Bedimo-Rung, J. F. Sallis, C. C. Voorhees, K. Ring, and J. P. Elder. 2006. Girls’ perception of physical environmental factors and transportation: Reliability and association with physical activity and active transport to school. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 3:28.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Ewing, R., T. Schmid, R. Killingsworth, A. Zlot, and S. Raudenbush. 2003. Relationship between urban sprawl and physical activity, obesity, and morbidity. American Journal of Health Promotion 18(1):47-57.

Ewing, R., R. C. Brownson, and D. Berrigan. 2006. Relationship between urban sprawl and weight of United States youth. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31(6):464-474.

Frank, L. D., M. A. Andresen, and T. L. Schmid. 2004. Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 27(2):87-96.

Frank, L. D., T. L. Schmid, J. F. Sallis, J. Chapman, and B. E. Saelens. 2005. Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: Findings from SMARTRAQ. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28(2 Suppl 2):117-125.

Franzini, L., M. N. Elliott, P. Cuccaro, M. Schuster, M. J. Gilliland, J. A. Grunbaum, F. Franklin, and S. R. Tortolero. 2009. Influences of physical and social neighborhood environments on children’s physical activity and obesity. American Journal of Public Health 99(2):271-278.

Fulkerson, J. A., M. C. Nelson, L. Lytle, S. Moe, C. Heitzler, and K. E. Pasch. 2008. The validation of a home food inventory. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 5:55.

Gattshall, M. L., J. A. Shoup, J. A. Marshall, L. A. Crane, and P. A. Estabrooks. 2008. Validation of a survey instrument to assess home environments for physical activity and healthy eating in overweight children. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 5:3.

Glanz, K., J. F. Sallis, B. E. Saelens, and L. D. Frank. 2007. Nutrition environment measures survey in stores (NEMS-S): Development and evaluation. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 32(4):282-289.

Gomez, J. E., B. A. Johnson, M. Selva, and J. F. Sallis. 2004. Violent crime and outdoor physical activity among inner-city youth. Preventive Medicine 39(5):876-881.

Gordon-Larsen, P., M. C. Nelson, P. Page, and B. M. Popkin. 2006. Inequality in the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity and obesity. Pediatrics 117(2):417-424.

Gosliner, W., K. A. Madsen, G. Woodward-Lopez, and P. B. Crawford. 2011. Would students prefer to eat healthier foods at school? Journal of School Health 81(3):146-151.

Graham, D. J., M. Schneider, and S. S. Dickerson. 2011. Environmental resources moderate the relationship between social support and school sports participation among adolescents: A cross-sectional analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 8:34.

Grigsby-Toussaint, D. S., I. K. Moise, and S. D. Geiger. 2011. Observations of marketing on food packaging targeted to youth in retail food stores. Obesity (Silver Spring) 19(9):1898-1900.

Haire-Joshu, D., B. W. Yount, E. L. Budd, C. Schwarz, R. Schermbeck, S. Green, and M. Elliott. 2011. The quality of school wellness policies and energy-balance behaviors of adolescent mothers. Preventing Chronic Disease 8(2):A34.

Hayes, L. R. 2000. Are prices higher for the poor in New York City? Journal of Consumer Policy 12(1-2):69-101.

Hearn, M.D., T. Baranowski, J. Baranowski, C. Doyle, M. Smith, L. S. Lin, and K. Resnicow. 1998. Environmental influences on dietary behavior among children: Availability and accessibility of fruits and vegetables enable consumption. Journal of Health Education 29(1):26-32.

Helling, A., and D. S. Sawicki. 2003. Race and residential accessibility to shopping and services. Housing Policy Debate 12(1-2):69-101.

Hendrickson, D., C. Smith, and N. Eikenberry. 2006. Fruit and vegetable access in four lower income food deserts communities in Minnesota. Agriculture and Human Values 23(3):371-383.

Hino, A. A. F., R. S. Reis, I. C. Ribeiro, D. C. Parra, R. C. Brownson, and R. C. Fermino. 2010. Using observational methods to evaluate public open spaces and physical activity in Brazil. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 7(Suppl 2):S146-154.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Horodynski, M. A., M. Stommel, H. E. Brophy-Herb, and L. Weatherspoon. 2010. Mealtime television viewing and dietary quality in low-income African American and caucasian mother-toddler dyads. Maternal and Child Health Journal 14(4):548-556.

Horowitz, C. R., K. A. Colson, P. L. Hebert, and K. Lancaster. 2004. Barriers to buying healthy foods for people with diabetes: Evidence of environmental disparities. American Journal of Public Health 94(9):1549-1554.

Huston, S. L., K. R. Evenson, P. Bors, and Z. Gizlice. 2003. Neighborhood environment, access to places for activity, and leisure-time physical activity in a diverse North Carolina population. American Journal of Health Promotion 18(1):58-69.

Ihmels, M. A., G. J. Welk, J. C. Eisenmann, and S. M. Nusser. 2009. Development and preliminary validation of a Family Nutrition and Physical Activity (FNPA) screening tool. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 6:14.

Inagami, S., D. A. Cohen, B. K. Finch, and S. M. Asch. 2006. You are where you shop: Grocery store locations, weight, and neighborhoods. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31(1):10-17.

IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2012. Accelerating progress in obesity prevention: Solving the weight of the nation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Israel, B. A., A. J. Schulz, L. Estrada-Martinez, S. N. Zenk, E. Viruell-Fuentes, A. M. Villarruel, and C. Stokes. 2006. Engaging urban residents in assessing neighborhood environments and their implications for health. Journal of Urban Health 83(3):523-539.

Jilcott, S. B., T. Keyserling, T. Crawford, J. T. McGuirt, and A. S. Ammerman. 2011a. Examining associations among obesity and per capita farmers’ markets, grocery stores/supermarkets, and supercenters in US counties. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 111(4):567-572.

Jilcott, S. B., S. Wade, J. T. McGuirt, Q. Wu, S. Lazorick, and J. B. Moore. 2011b. The association between the food environment and weight status among eastern North Carolina youth. Public Health Nutrition 14(9):1610-1617.

Kaufman, P. 1999. Rural poor have less access to supermarkets, large grocery stores. Rural Development Perspectives 13(3):19-26.

Kimm, S. Y., N. W. Glynn, A. M. Kriska, S. L. Fitzgerald, D. J. Aaron, S. L. Similo, R. P. McMahon, and B. A. Barton. 2000. Longitudinal changes in physical activity in a biracial cohort during adolescence. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 32(8):1445-1454.

King, W. C., S. H. Belle, J. S. Brach, L. R. Simkin-Silverman, T. Soska, and A. M. Kriska. 2005. Objective measures of neighborhood environment and physical activity in older women. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28(5):461-469.

Kipke, M. D., E. Iverson, D. Moore, C. Booker, V. Ruelas, A. L. Peters, and F. Kaufman. 2007. Food and park environments: Neighborhood-level risks for childhood obesity in east Los Angeles. Journal of Adolescent Health 40(4):325-333.

Kirtland, K. A., D. E. Porter, C. L. Addy, M. J. Neet, J. E. Williams, P. A. Sharpe, L. J. Neff, C. D. Kimsey, Jr., and B. E. Ainsworth. 2003. Environmental measures of physical activity supports: Perception versus reality. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 24(4):323-331.

Lee, S. M., C. Tudor-Locke, and E. K. Burns. 2008. Application of a walking suitability assessment to the immediate built environment surrounding elementary schools. Health Promotion Practice 9(3):246-252.

Lewis, L. B., D. C. Sloane, L. M. Nascimento, A. L. Diamant, J. J. Guinyard, A. K. Yancey, and G. Flynn. 2005. African Americans’ access to healthy food options in south Los Angeles restaurants. American Journal of Public Health 95(4):668-673.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Li, F., P. Harmer, B. J. Cardinal, M. Bosworth, and D. Johnson-Shelton. 2009. Obesity and the built environment: Does the density of neighborhood fast-food outlets matter? American Journal of Health Promotion 23(3):203-209.

Liu, G. C., J. S. Wilson, R. Qi, and J. Ying. 2007. Green neighborhoods, food retail and childhood overweight: Differences by population density. American Journal of Health Promotion 21(4 Suppl):317-325.

McGinn, A. P., K. R. Evenson, A. H. Herring, and S. L. Huston. 2007a. The relationship between leisure, walking, and transportation activity with the natural environment. Health Place 13(3):588-602.

McGinn, A. P., K. R. Evenson, A. H. Herring, S. L. Huston, and D. A. Rodriguez. 2007b. Exploring associations between physical activity and perceived and objective measures of the built environment. Journal of Urban Health 84(2):162-184.

McGinn, A. P., K. R. Evenson, A. H. Herring, S. L. Huston, and D. A. Rodriguez. 2008. The association of perceived and objectively measured crime with physical activity: A cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 5(1):117-131.

McKenzie, T. L., S. J. Marshall, J. F. Sallis, and T. L. Conway. 2000. Leisure-time physical activity in school environments: An observational study using soplay. Preventive Medicine 30(1):70-77.

McKenzie, T. L., D. A. Cohen, A. Sehgal, S. Williamson, and D. Golinelli. 2006. System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC): Reliability and feasibility measures. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 3(Suppl 1):S208-S222.

Moore, L. V., and A. V. Diez Roux. 2006. Associations of neighborhood characteristics with the location and type of food stores. American Journal of Public Health 96(2):325-331.

Moreno, J. P., M. L. Kelley, D. N. Landry, V. Paasch, M. A. Terlecki, C. A. Johnston, and J. P. Foreyt. 2011. Development and validation of the family health behavior scale. International Journal of Pediatric Obesity 6(2-2):e480-e486.

Morland, K., S. Wing, A. Diez Roux, and C. Poole. 2002. Neighborhood characteristics associated with the location of food stores and food service places. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 22(1):23-29.

Morland, K., A. V. Diez Roux, and S. Wing. 2006. Supermarkets, other food stores, and obesity: The atherosclerosis risk in communities study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 30(4):333-339.

Mujahid, M. S., A. V. Diez Roux, J. D. Morenoff, and T. Raghunathan. 2007. Assessing the measurement properties of neighborhood scales: From psychometrics to ecometrics. American Journal of Epidemiology 165(8):858-867.

Nelson, M. C., P. Gordon-Larsen, Y. Song, and B. M. Popkin. 2006. Built and social environments associations with adolescent overweight and activity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 31(2):109-117.

Neumark-Sztainer, D., S. A. French, P. J. Hannan, M. Story, and J. A. Fulkerson. 2005. School lunch and snacking patterns among high school students: Associations with school food environment and policies. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2(1):14.

Norman, G. J., S. K. Nutter, S. Ryan, J. F. Sallis, K. J. Calfas, and K. Patrick. 2006. Community design and access to recreational facilities as correlates of adolescent physical activity and body-mass index. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 3(Suppl 1):S118-S128.

Pate, R. R., K. McIver, M. Dowda, W. H. Brown, and C. Addy. 2008. Directly observed physical activity levels in preschool children. Journal of School Health 78(8):438-444.

Polat, S., and B. Erci. 2010. Psychometric properties of the child feeding scale in Turkish mothers. Asian Nursing Research 4(3):111-121.

Roemmich, J. N., L. H. Epstein, S. Raja, and L. Yin. 2007. The neighborhood and home environments: Disparate relationships with physical activity and sedentary behaviors in youth. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 33(1):29-38.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Romero, A. J., T. N. Robinson, H. C. Kraemer, S. J. Erickson, K. F. Haydel, F. Mendoza, and J. D. Killen. 2001. Are perceived neighborhood hazards a barrier to physical activity in children? Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 155(10):1143-1148.

Rossen, L. M., K. M. Pollack, F. C. Curriero, T. M. Shields, M. J. Smart, C. D. Furr-Holden, and M. Cooley-Strickland. 2011. Neighborhood incivilities, perceived neighborhood safety, and walking to school among urban-dwelling children. Journal of Physical Activity and Health 8(2):262-271.

Rundle, A., A. V. Diez Roux, L. M. Free, D. Miller, K. M. Neckerman, and C. C. Weiss. 2007. The urban built environment and obesity in New York City: A multilevel analysis. American Journal of Health Promotion 21(4 Suppl):326-334.

Saelens, B. E., J. F. Sallis, J. B. Black, and D. Chen. 2003. Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: An environment scale evaluation. American Journal of Public Health 93(9):1552-1558.

Scott, M. M., K. R. Evenson, D. A. Cohen, and C. E. Cox. 2007. Comparing perceived and objectively measured access to recreational facilities as predictors of physical activity in adolescent girls. Journal of Urban Health 84(3):346-359.

Sirard, J. R., M. C. Nelson, M. A. Pereira, and L. A. Lytle. 2008. Validity and reliability of a home environment inventory for physical activity and media equipment. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 5:24.

Sloane, D. C., A. L. Diamant, L. B. Lewis, A. K. Yancey, G. Flynn, L. M. Nascimento, W. J. McCarthy, J. J. Guinyard, and M. R. Cousineau. 2003. Improving the nutritional resource environment for healthy living through community-based participatory research. Journal of General Internal Medicine 18(7):568-575.

Spivock, M., L. Gauvin, and J. M. Brodeur. 2007. Neighborhood-level active living buoys for individuals with physical disabilities. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 32(3):224-230.

Stevens, J., C. E. Cornell, M. Story, S. A. French, S. Levin, A. Becenti, J. Gittelsohn, S. B. Going, and R. Reid. 1999. Development of a questionnaire to assess knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors in American Indian children. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 69(4 Suppl):773S-781S.

Story, M., N. E. Sherwood, J. H. Himes, M. Davis, D. R. Jacobs, Jr., Y. Cartwright, M. Smyth, and J. Rochon. 2003a. An after-school obesity prevention program for African-American girls: The Minnesota GEMS pilot study. Ethnicity and Disease 13(1 Suppl 1):S54-S64.

Story, M., M. P. Snyder, J. Anliker, J. L. Weber, L. Cunningham-Sabo, E. J. Stone, A. Chamberlain, B. Ethelbah, C. Suchindran, and K. Ring. 2003b. Changes in the nutrient content of school lunches: Results from the Pathways study. Preventive Medicine 37(6 Pt 2):S35-S45.

Surkan, P. J., A. J. Coutinho, K. Christiansen, L. A. Dennisuk, S. Suratkar, E. Mead, S. Sharma, and J. Gittelsohn. 2011. Healthy food purchasing among African American youth: Associations with child gender, adult caregiver characteristics and the home food environment. Public Health Nutrition 14(4):670-677.

Taber, D. R., J. Stevens, K. R. Evenson, D. S. Ward, C. Poole, M. L. Maciejewski, D. M. Murray, and R. C. Brownson. 2011. State policies targeting junk food in schools: Racial/ethnic differences in the effect of policy change on soda consumption. American Journal of Public Health 101(9):1769-1775.

Tester, J. M., I. H. Yen, L. C. Pallis, and B. A. Laraia. 2011. Healthy food availability and participation in WIC (special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children) in food stores around lower- and higher-income elementary schools. Public Health Nutrition 14(6):960-964.

Welk, G. J., E. Wickel, M. Peterson, C. D. Heitzler, J. E. Fulton, and L. D. Potter. 2007. Reliability and validity of questions on the youth media campaign longitudinal survey. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 39(4):612-621.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

Williams, J. E., M. Evans, K. A. Kirtland, M. M. Cavnar, P. A. Sharpe, M. J. Neet, and A. Cook. 2005. Development and use of a tool for assessing sidewalk maintenance as an environmental support of physical activity. Health Promotion Practice 6(1):81-88.

Witten, K., D. Exeter, and A. Field. 2003. The quality of urban environments: Mapping, variation in access to community resources. Urban Studies 40(1):161-177.

Wolch, J., M. Jerrett, K. Reynolds, R. McConnell, R. Chang, N. Dahmann, K. Brady, F. Gilliland, J. G. Su, and K. Berhane. 2011. Childhood obesity and proximity to urban parks and recreational resources: A longitudinal cohort study. Health Place 17(1):207-214.

Woolf, S. H., and P. Braveman. 2011. Where health disparities begin: The role of social and economic determinants—and why current policies may make matters worse. Health Affairs 30(10):18521859.

Wright, N. D., A. E. Groisman-Perelstein, J. Wylie-Rosett, N. Vernon, P. M. Diamantis, and C. R. Isasi. 2011. A lifestyle assessment and intervention tool for pediatric weight management: The habits questionnaire. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 24(1):96-100.

Yoo, S., T. Baranowski, M. Missaghian, J. Baranowski, K. Cullen, J. O. Fisher, K. Watson, I. F. Zakeri, and T. Nicklas. 2006. Food-purchasing patterns for home: A grocery store-intercept survey. Public Health Nutrition 9(3):384-393.

Zenk, S. N., A. J. Schulz, T. Hollis-Neely, R. T. Campbell, N. Holmes, G. Watkins, R. Nwankwo, and A. Odoms-Young. 2005a. Fruit and vegetable intake in African Americans income and store characteristics. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 29(1):1-9.

Zenk, S. N., A. J. Schulz, B. A. Israel, S. A. James, S. Bao, and M. L. Wilson. 2005b. Neighborhood racial composition, neighborhood poverty, and the spatial accessibility of supermarkets in metropolitan Detroit. American Journal of Public Health 95(4):660-667.

Zenk, S. N., A. J. Schulz, B. A. Israel, S. A. James, S. Bao, and M. L. Wilson. 2006. Fruit and vegetable access differs by community racial composition and socioeconomic position in Detroit, Michigan. Ethnicity and Disease 16(1):275-280.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

TABLE E-1 Physical Activity Environment Measurement Tools and Research Methods

Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Urban Design Audit (Alfonzo et al., 2008) Community level Observation tool for urban design characteristics of neighborhoods Items: NR; self-administered N=NR, 11 neighborhoods in California; Parents of 3-5th grade students Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, crime/ safety, facility adequacy or quality aesthetics, land use, pedestrian infrastructure Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, employment, education, number of cars in household Life course exposure: NR
African American Health Neighborhood Assessment Scale (Andresen et al., 2008) Community level To determine observer ratings of neighborhoods and establish psychometric properties 88 items, 7-item scale; researcher-administered, direct observation N=998 adults Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – concurrent, discriminant, convergent Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Aesthetics, pedestrian infrastructure, traffic safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Environment Walkability Survey (NEWS) (Atkinson et al., 2005) Community level To assess neighborhood design factors and recreational environments 68 items; self-administered questionnaire N=102 adults Reliability – test-retest; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, crime/ safety, traffic safety, facility access, aesthetics, land use, population and housing density, pedestrian infrastructure, home PA equipment Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Home Environment Factors for Adolescent Girls (Bauer et al., 2011) Home-individual level To assess familial support for adolescents’ PA, healthful dietary intake, and limiting TV use; parental modeling of behavior; and resources in the home Items: NR; self- or third-party-administered N=253 parents of adolescent girls grades 9-12 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Home access/ availability of PA equipment/ fruit/vegetable, TV use, access/availability to healthful foods Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Youth/Adolescent Questionnaire for 9 to 14 Year Olds (Berkey et al., 2000) Individual level To examine the role of PA, inactivity, and dietary patterns on annual weight changes among preadolescents and adolescents, taking growth and development into account 132 items N=10,769 children 6-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NA Life course exposure: Assessed over 12-month period
Physical Activity Questionnaire for 9 to 14 Year Olds (Berkey et al., 2000) 17 items Reliability – inter-instrument; Validity – criterion
TV, Video, & Games Questionnaire for 9 to 14 Year Olds (Berkey et al., 2000) Items: NR Reliability – NR; Validity – NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
School and Home Physical Activity and Inactivity Questionnaire (Berkey et al., 2000) Record or log of moderate to vigorous PA Reliability – NR; Validity – NR
Neighborhood Design Scale (Braza et al., 2004) Individual level To determine how 5th-grade students arrived to school 1 week before Walk to School Day 1 item; GIS protocol N=NR, 5th-grade students from 34 of 150 elementary schools surveyed Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, population and housing density Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – WIC/school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Physical Activity Environment (Brownson et al., 2004) Community level Tested reliability of 3 questionnaires that assess social and physical environments 61 items; researcher-administered by phone N=97 adults Reliability – test-retest; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Facility adequacy, access, aesthetics Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, employment, education Life course exposure: NR
Perceived Community and Workplace Environment (Brownson et al., 2004) Community level Tested reliability of 3 questionnaires that assess social and physical environments 104 items; researcher-administered by phone N=99 Reliability – test retest with four subscales; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Perceived barriers to PA, cycling infrastructure, pedestrian/traffic safety, policy Sociocultural: Social environment Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, employment, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Neighborhood Playgrounds and Safety (Burdette and Whitaker, 2004) Community level To assess BMI, proximity to fast food restaurants/playgrounds, and objective tools and methods of crime in neighborhoods; GIS protocol N=7,020 children 3-5 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Neighborhood crime/safety, facility access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC/school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Parental Report of Outdoor Playtime (Burdette and Whitaker, 2004) Individual level To compare a direct method of PA in preschool-aged children with 2 parental-report methods of children’s outdoor playtime 4 items; third party, direct observation N=250 children Reliability – NR; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Recess, play breaks Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Proximity of Fast Food Restaurants (Burdette and Whitaker, 2004) Community level To examine the proximity of children’s residences to playgrounds and fast food restaurants and neighborhood safety GIS protocol N=7,020 low-income children Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability/access to fast food restaurants Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC/school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Environmental and Policy Factors (Catlin et al., 2003) Individual level To measure perceived association between environmental and policy factors and overweight 92 items; researcher-administered by phone N=2,821 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Pedestrian infrastructure, aesthetics, facility access, cycling infrastructure, pedestrian/ crime/safety, policy Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – employment, education, marital status Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Observation Tool for Urban Neighborhoods (Caughy et al., 2001) Community level To develop a brief observational method for urban neighborhoods relevant to the health and well-being of families and children 45 items Reliability – test-retest; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, white, multiethnic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Crime/safety, facility adequacy/appeal, land use, aesthetics/beautification Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, employment, per capita crime, average household wealth Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) and NEWS-Abbrev (NEWS-A) (Cerin et al., 2009) Individual level Assess perceived environmental attributes believed to influence PA 67 items; self-administered by mail N=912 subjects in 16 neighborhoods Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – construct validity Racial/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, HI/ PI, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, crime/ safety, aesthetics, land use, population/housing density, pedestrian safety/ infrastructure Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Activity Support Scale for Multiple Groups (ACTS-MG) for Parents of Elementary School-Aged Children (Davison et al., 2011) Individual level Adapted tool/method from the Activity Support Scale for use with AA parents, assess behaviors of sports/rec, video, recess, screen time; focus groups to guide development 12 items; self-administered or in person N=119 AA and 117 white parents Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – content Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Total environments/locations, after-school/out-of-school youth programs, community/ neighborhood as a whole, parks/playground, recreational facility/area, school, transportation infrastructure, youth programs Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Availability of Recreational Resources (Diez Roux et al., 2007) Community level Data from a large cohort of adults to investigate availability of recreational resources related to PA levels; GIS protocol N=2,723 adults Reliability – NR; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Facility access, appeal or quality, crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Measures of Walkability and Safety (Doyle et al., 2006) Community level Measurement tool adapted from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III – data on individual health parameters in 35 counties compared to county crime and walkability Items: NR; researcher-administered N=9,252 adults across 35 urban counties Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, pedestrian infrastructure, crime/safety Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education, and time living in area Life course exposure: NR
Barriers to Walking for PA (Dunton and Schneider, 2006) Community level Questions to measure barriers to walking for PA were developed and tested among college students 10 items; type of measure: NR N=305 college students Reliability – test-retest, internal consistency; Validity – criterion, concurrent Race/ethnicity: Hispanic, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Total environment, locations, commute Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Density, Design, and Diversity Near Home (Epstein et al., 2006) Community level To determine whether characteristics of neighborhood environment are related to substitution of PA for sedentary behavior; GIS protocol N=58 children 8-15 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – construct validity, accelerometer data Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Land use, facility access, street connectivity, population/housing density Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – socioeconomic index Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Women and Physical Activity Survey (Evenson et al., 2003) Individual level To examine the test-retest reliability of a survey designed to measure PA and its correlates among women from diverse racial and ethnic groups 13-item survey; researcher-administered by phone N=344 women Reliability – test-retest; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Sense of community, crime, traffic, overall PA environment, sidewalks, exercise places, unattended dogs, street light at night Sociocultural: Covariates – psychological perceptions, social influence Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – employment, education, marital status Life course exposure: NR
Perceived PA Environment (Evenson et al., 2003) Community level To assess physical environmental factors that might be associated with PA in a diverse adult population; Pikora framework 51 items; researcher-administered by phone N=106 adults Reliability – test-retest, internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Crime/safety, pedestrian/traffic safety, facility access, adequacy, aesthetics, land use, pedestrian infrastructure, facility access, availability/ proximity Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – employment, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Perceptions of Physical Environmental Factors (Evenson et al., 2003) Individual level Questionnaire to determine perceptions of physical environment and transportation 26 items; self-administered N=610 6th- and 8th-grade girls Reliability – test-retest, multiple subscales; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Crime/safety, pedestrian/traffic safety, facility access, pedestrian infrastructure, aesthetics/ beautification Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – WIC/school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Urban Sprawl Index (Ewing et al., 2003) Community level Assess relationship between built environment and weight GIS protocol N=6,760 subjects in 954 urban counties Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, crime, population/housing density, sprawl Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
National Longitudinal Survey of Youth: Diet and Activity Questions (Ewing et al., 2006) Community level To determine if urban sprawl is associated with health, BMI for U.S. youth 9 items; researcher-administered questionnaire N=6,760 subjects in 954 counties Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Built Environment Measurements (Frank et al., 2004) Community level To evaluate the relationship between built environment and place of residence, travel patterns N=10,878 Reliability – NR; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Total environment, location, community/neighborhood, population/housing density, land use, street connectivity Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Walkability Index (Frank et al., 2005) Community level Objective measures of the built environment unique to each household’s physical location developed within a GIS to assess land-use mix, residential density, and street connectivity. Measures were then combined into a walkability index; GIS protocol N=357 Reliability – NR; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, land use, population/housing density Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Physical Activity Survey for 5th Graders (Franzini et al., 2009) Community level Survey of environmental characteristics, adopted from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey and the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods Community Survey Items: NR; observation and questionnaire N=650 children Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, cycling infrastructure, facility access, adequacy/appeal, population/ housing density, crime/safety, aesthetics, urban design qualities Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Traffic, Safety, and Social Factors Scales (Franzini et al., 2009) Community level Tools and methods to investigate the association between physical and social neighborhood environments and 5th-grade students’ PA and obesity Self-administered and observation N=650 children and caregivers Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Neighborhood, crime/safety, pedestrian/traffic safety, aesthetics, land use, population/housing density, social environment Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Home Environment Survey (Gattshall et al., 2008) Home – individual level To validate a survey instrument to assess home environments for PA and healthy eating in overweight children 126 items; self-administered questionnaire N=219 children; N=156 parents Reliability – inter-rater, test-retest, internal consistency; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Food environment, PA environment, individual diet and PA variables Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence, parental modeling Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Perceived Barriers to Physical Activity (Gomez et al., 2004) Individual level To model relationships between outdoor PA and objective violent crime densities Questionnaire items NR; self-administered N=177 low-income adolescents, 12 to 18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – construct validity, two criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Perceived crime/ safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Measure of Crime and Built Environment (Gomez et al., 2004) Community level To compare PA with crime densities and perception of neighborhood safety and levels of PA; GIS protocol N=177 low-income adolescents, 12 to 18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – construct validity Race/ethnicity: Multiethnic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Facility access, availability, proximity, crime/ safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Physical Activity Facilities (Gordon-Larsen et al., 2006) Community level Assess the geographic and social distribution of PA facilities and how disparity in access might underlie population-level PA and overweight patterns; GIS protocol N=20,745 students 12-18 yrs old in 132 schools across 42,857 census blocks Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: White Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Facility access, availability, proximity Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates: SES, race; Related variables – education, population density Life course exposure: NR
Perceived Physical Competence and Social Support for Physical Activity Scales for 14 Year Olds (Graham et al., 2011) Individual level Measurement of access to environmental PA resources moderates the relationship between psychosocial resources (social support and perceived competence) and PA 16 items; self-administered N=130 subjects 12-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Environmental Features Linked to Physical Activity for 14 Year Olds (Graham et al., 2011) Community level To determine access to environmental PA resources moderates the relationship between psychosocial resources (social support and perceived competence) and PA Construction of tool/method from existing data N=192 adolescents Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual Identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: PA environment variables, facility access, pedestrian infrastructure Sociocultural: Covariates – self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Parks and Squares in Curitiba, Brazil (Hino et al., 2010) Community level Direct observation of parks and squares in differing SES neighborhoods to determine PA and demographics of users GIS protocol; sample size – NR Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: Hispanic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Cycling infrastructure, facility access, adequacy/appeal or quality, population/housing density, open space/greenness Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Environment and Access (Huston et al., 2003) Community level Adapted tool/measure to examine associations between perceived neighborhood characteristics, access to places for activity, and leisure-time PA, derived from Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 133 items; phone interview N=1,796 subjects located in 6 counties in North Carolina Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/AN, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Pedestrian traffic safety, infrastructure, street lights, unattended dogs Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Physical Activity Environment, Healthy Environment Partnership (HEP) Survey (Israel et al., 2006) Individual level To delineate the manner in which urban environments reflect broader social processes, such as those creating racially, ethnically, and economically segregated communities with vast differences in aspects of the built environment, opportunity structures, social environments, and environmental exposures N=57 focus groups Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Perceived stressors Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Habitual Activity Questionnaire (Kimm et al., 2000) Individual level To develop and use two self-report methods and an objective measure to assess longitudinal changes in PA in a large bi-ethnic cohort of young girls from childhood through adolescence Number of items: NR; self-, third-party-, researcher-administered N=2,379 AA and white girls 9-10 to 18-19 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Census-Based and Land-Use Measures of the Environment (King et al., 2005) Community level To identify objectively measured attributes of the neighborhood environment that may be associated with PA levels in older women; GIS protocol N=158 women Reliability – NR; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Facility access, availability, proximity, median year homes built was used to capture general differences in street design, land use Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – employment, education, marital status Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Availability and Quality of Local Parks (Kipke et al., 2007) Community level To examine how environmental factors may be associated with increased risk for obesity; GIS protocol Researcher-administered, direct observation N=1,803 subjects 18-59 yrs old Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: Hispanic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Pedestrian infrastructure, land use, aesthetics, facility adequacy, crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Physical Activity Environment Measures (Kirtland et al., 2003) Individual level Survey of perceived environmental characteristics and correlated to objective environmental measures to determine validity and reliability; correlated with GIS 26 items; researcher-administered by phone N=1,112 adults Reliability – test-retest; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Perceptions of crime/safety, pedestrian/ traffic safety, facility access, adequacy/appeal, pedestrian infrastructure, social environment Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Walking Suitability Score (Lee et al., 2008) Community level To examine the usefulness of applying a walking suitability assessment to geographic area around schools 11 items; sample size = NR Reliability – NR; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Pedestrian, traffic, infrastructure Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC/school lunch participation Life course exposure: NR
Perceived Natural Environment (McGinn et al., 2007a) Individual level Adapted from 2001 BRFSS module–perceived measures of natural environment and PA; Questionnaire and GIS protocol Researcher-administered N=1,482 adults Reliability – test-retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Statewide Living and working conditions: Weather, trees, exhaust fumes/pollution Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Street Connectivity and Traffic Measures (McGinn et al., 2007b) Community level Survey to describe associations between perceptions and objective measures of the built environment and their associations with leisure, walking, and transportation activity; questionnaire and GIS protocol N=1,270 telephone surveys Reliability – NR; Validity – predictive, concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, pedestrian/ traffic safety, infrastructure, sidewalks Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Crime and Safety Index (McGinn et al., 2008) Individual level To compare perceived area crime, objectively measured to assess for correlation 6 items; Researcher-administered by phone N=1,658 adults Reliability – test-retest; Validity – concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Objective Measures of Crime (McGinn et al., 2008) Community level To compare measures of perceived crime with observed crime and examine association between independent and combined effects of objective and perceived crime on PA; GIS protocol Items: NR N=303 Reliability – NR; Validity – concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Family Health Behavior Scale of 5-12 year olds (Moreno et al., 2011) Individual level To develop a psychometrically sound, parent-report measure of family and child behaviors related to obesity in children 27 items; self-administered N=47 children 5-12 yrs old Reliability – test retest, internal consistency; Validity – concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES levels Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Characteristics Measure (Nelson et al., 2006) Community level Adapted from National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (1994-1995) to determine patterning of neighborhood characteristics, beyond basic urban, rural, suburban trichotomy, and its impact on PA and overweight; GIS protocol N=20,745 students 12-18 yrs old in 132 schools Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural/ suburban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, crime, pedestrian infrastructure, family access, comparison of weight and PA survey data to subject neighborhood characteristics Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Measure of Community Design and Access to Recreational Facilities (Norman et al., 2006) Community level To establish neighborhood-level environmental features and their association with adolescent PA and weight status, PA correlated with GIS analysis of surrounding environment; GIS protocol N=799 subjects 6-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, facility access, land use, population/ housing density, pedestrian infrastructure, retail floor area and walkability index Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Neighborhood Environment GIS Characteristics (Roemmich et al., 2007) Community level To determine whether the neighborhood environment or number of televisions in home environment are independently associated with child PA and television time; GIS protocol N=78 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white, multiethnic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Pedestrian/ traffic safety, facility access, population/housing density, street width/connectivity, land use Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – employment/unemployment Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Hazards (Romero et al., 2001) Individual level Questionnaire measuring child’s perception of hazards 8 items N=796 students Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education, SES based on occupation Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Inventory of Environmental Typology (NIfETy) Method for Urban Children (Rossen et al., 2011) Individual level Survey of parents and children on walking practices, analysis of environment for safety, using measure adapted from the Multiple Opportunities to Reach Excellence (2007) objective structured inventory 78 items N=365 subjects 6-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white, multiethnic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Crime/safety, neighborhood activities, adult activity, youth activity, physical disorder Sociocultural: Social environment Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education, employment status, WIC/ school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Built Environment Characteristics (Rundle et al., 2007) Community level To examine whether urban form is associated with body size within a densely settled city; GIS protocol N=13,102 Reliability – NR; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Street connectivity, land use, population/housing density, access to public transportation Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale (NEWS) (Saelens et al., 2003) Individual level To assess walkability of environment and self-reported PA, weight, and height 68 items; questionnaire N=107 adults in 2 neighborhoods Reliability – test-retest; Validity – concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Perceived street connectivity, crime/safety, pedestrian traffic safety, cycling infrastructure, aesthetics, land use, pedestrian infrastructure, population/housing density Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Perceived Access to Recreational Facilities (Scott et al., 2007) Individual level To examine the relationship between number and proximity of objectively measured PA facilities and perceptions and compare objective and self-report measures as predictors of PA Items: NR; self- or researcher-administered N=1,367 6th-grade girls who participated in the Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls (TAAG) Reliability – NR; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Facility access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Physical Activity and Media Inventory (PAMI) (Sirard et al., 2008) Individual level To comprehensively reflect the availability and accessibility of PA and screen media equipment in the home environment 61 items; self- or researcher-administered, in-person or mail N=31 adults Reliability – test-retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white, multiethnic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Perceived facility access, adequacy/appeal or quality, objective review of number of rooms, PA media equipment Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education, home ownership values Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Facility Availability and Accessibility Measure (Spivock et al., 2007) Community level To describe extent to which environmental supports (buoys) promoting active living among individuals with disabilities are present in neighborhoods located in a large urban area, examine association between presence of buoys and neighborhood-level indicators of affluence, proportions of individuals w/disabilities living in the neighborhood, and other active living indicators 18-item survey; researcher-administered, direct observation N=112 neighborhoods Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: Yes Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Pedestrian/traffic safety, cycling infrastructure, facility adequacy, pedestrian infrastructure, crime/safety, aesthetics/beautification Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors in American Indian Children (Stevens et al., 1999) Individual level To develop a culturally sensitive, age-appropriate questionnaire to assess PA, diet, weight-related attitudes, and cultural identity 130-item questionnaire; in person, self-administered N=371 school children 6-11 yrs old Reliability – test-retest; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AI/AN Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Modeling of PA environment and barriers Sociocultural: Weight-related attitudes, culture; Covariates – knowledge, psychological factors (e.g., self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences), social influence (e.g., parent modeling) Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Measures of Sidewalk Maintenance (Williams et al., 2005) Individual level To develop and test objective tool to measure sidewalk maintenance N=5 items; Sample size = NR; researcher-administered Reliability – Inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Pedestrian infrastructure Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Community Resource Accessibility Index (CRAI) (Witten et al., 2003) Community level To develop an area-based index of locational access to community services, facilities, and amenities; GIS protocol Sample size = NR Reliability – NR; Validity – face Race/ethnicity: HI/PI, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Objective measure of facility access, adequacy/ appeal or quality/type of facility, availability/access to food Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Park Area and Recreation Programs for Southern California Communities (Wolch et al., 2011) Community level To assess how proximity to parks and recreational resources affects development of childhood obesity through a longitudinal study; GIS protocol, construction of measure from existing data N=3,173 children 9-10 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – Income, employment status Life course exposure: Subjects followed 8 years
Park Area and Recreation Programs for Southern California Communities (Wolch et al., 2011) Community level To assess how proximity to parks and recreational resources affects development of childhood obesity through a longitudinal study; GIS protocol, construction of measure from existing data N=3,173 children 9-10 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Crime/safety Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, employment status Life course exposure: Subjects followed 8 years
HABITS Questionnaire (Wright et al., 2011) Individual level To establish convergent validity and reliability for a quick simple measure of food intake and PA/ sedentary behavior 19 items N=35 children 7-16 yrs old Reliability – test retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
HABITS Questionnaire (Wright et al., 2011) Individual level To establish convergent validity and reliability for a quick simple measure of food intake and PA/ sedentary behavior 19 items N=35 children 7-16 yrs old Reliability – test retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR

NOTES: AA = African American, AI = American Indian; AN = Alaska Native; BMI = body mass index; F = female; GIS = geographic information systems; HI/PI = Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; M = male; NR = not relevant; PA = physical activity; SES = socioeconomic status; WIC = Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

TABLE E-2 Food and Beverage Environment Measurement Tools and Research Methods

Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Grocery Store Manager Questionnaire (Abarca and Ramachandran, 2005) Individual level To develop an interview for administration to grocery store managers in communities along the Arizona-Mexico border 26 questions; in-person interview, delivery in English/Spanish Number of subjects: NR Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: Hispanic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Total and grocery store environment and access to low-fat foods, whole grains, low-fat dairy, meat, fish, poultry, eggs, Equal sweetener, juice, jello, salt/ substitute Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Measure of Access to Fruits and Vegetables (Algert et al., 2006) Community level To examine the extent to which food pantry clients live within reasonable walking distance of stores carrying fresh produce Existing data; items not included N=3,985 food pantry clients and 84 food stores Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability/access to foods across multiple environments Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – food security/insecurity; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) (Andrews et al., 2001) Community level To assess whether food is available and affordable in a community by determining how much a family would have to spend in local area stores to buy a specific set of relatively lower-cost foods that make up a nutritious diet 68 items; self-administered or researcher-administered N=NR Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability/access to a variety of foods Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability/ pricing; Related variables – income, WIC/school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
GIS Measures of Accessibility and Cluster Analysis of Geographic Accessibility to Grocery Stores (Apparicio et al., 2007) Community level To identify food deserts in socially deprived areas within cities with poor access to food retailers; Based on three measures of accessibility to supermarkets calculated using GIS Existing data; Items – NR; Assessment of Montreal, including proximity, diversity, and variety in terms of food and prices Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability/access to foods via supermarkets Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – predominately low income, employment/unemployment, areas of poverty, education Life course exposure: NR
Availability of Large Supermarkets (Ball et al., 2006) Community level To test the contribution of individual, social, and environmental factors to mediating SES inequalities in fruit/ vegetable consumption among women; GIS protocol N=45 neighborhoods, 3,547 women Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Fruits/vegetable availability Sociocultural: Covariates – psychological factors (self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences) and social influence (parent modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Home Fruit and Vegetable Availability Interview (Baranowski et al., 2006) Individual level To assess the psychometric characteristics of new scales of shopping practices and social support for purchasing fruits and vegetables Items – NR; researcher-administered N=166 food shoppers with children at home Reliability – test-retest, internal consistency; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Purchasing habits, label reading Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Survey on Purchasing Fruits and Vegetables (Baranowski et al., 2007) Individual level To validate four scales – outcome expectancies for purchasing fruit and for purchasing vegetables, and comparative outcome expectancies for purchasing fresh fruit and for purchasing fresh vegetables versus other forms of fruit and vegetables 72 items; researcher-administered N=161 Reliability – test-retest, internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability, access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Questionnaire on Influences on Fruit, Juice, and Vegetable (FJV) Availability (Baranowski et al., 2008) Individual level A scale for home fruit/juice/ vegetable pantry management practices was generated from focus group discussions with diverse 162 food shoppers 24 items; researcher-administered focus groups N=122 adults Reliability – NA; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Home Fruit, Juice, and Vegetables Pantry Management Practices Survey Instruments (Baranowski et al., 2008) Individual level–home environment To develop a scale for home FJV pantry management practices generated from focus group discussions with food shoppers 24 items; self-administered by phone N=171 food shoppers Reliability – test-retest; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Home availability and access to FJV Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Home Foods Availability Survey (Befort et al., 2006) Individual level–home environment To explore home food availability and common settings of food consumption as correlates of fruit, vegetable, and fat intake among a sample of non-Hispanic black and white adolescents 45 items; third-party-administered N=144 adolescents and their parents Reliability – NR; Validity – NA Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Home availability and access to fruit and vegetables, fat foods Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Block Urban Area Market Basket Survey (Block and Kouba, 2006) Community level The U.S. Department of Agriculture standard market basket survey and methodology were modified to characterize the food landscape of an inner-city AA neighborhood and its mixed-race suburban neighbor; detailed analysis focuses on the relationship between community store mix, price, availability, produce quality Environmental observation; researcher-administered N=134 surveys of retail food stores in Austin and Oak Park, Illinois Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white, multiethnic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability and access to fruit and vegetables Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – pricing or cost variables; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Fast Food Restaurant Density (FFRD) GIS Analysis (Block et al., 2004) Community level To determine the geographic distribution of fast food restaurants relative to neighborhood sociodemographics; GIS protocol N=155 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability and access to foods Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) (Boles et al., 2010) Individual level To examine the factor structure for three of the CFQ subscales, a widely used measure of parental feeding practices 31 items N=296 low-income parents of AA preschool children Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES; Related variables – WIC/ school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Healthy Home Survey (Bryant et al., 2008) Individual level To develop a survey to assess characteristics of the home environment 21 items; researcher- or self-administered N=85 families with at least 1 child between 3-8 yrs old; N=45 for repeat testing Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability, access, policy/practice, meals together, facility adequacy and quality of home/building environment Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Menu Checklist on Healthy Choice Cues (Cassady et al., 2004) Individual level–community assessment To develop and test menu checklist to assess cues for healthy choices in restaurants 31 items N=NR Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Labeling, point of purchase, food quality at restaurants Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Neighborhood Food Expenditures for 10 to 14 Year Olds (Dennisuk et al., 2011) Individual level To investigate food purchasing behaviors of low-income, urban AA youth using Youth Impact Questionnaire (YIQ) Items – NR; researcher-administered interviews N=237 low-income households, child and caregiver Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability/access to foods via convenience/ corner, limited service/fast food, recreational and other food facilities Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – pricing or cost variables; Related variables – income, education, employment/ unemployment, program participation (e.g., WIC, reduced school meals), household size Life course exposure: NR
Community and Home Food Environments for 5 to 18 Year Olds (Ding et al., 2012) Community level To determine reliability of new food environment measures; association between home food environment and fruit and vegetable intake/community and home food environment 20 items; self- or third-party-administered N=458 adolescents and parents Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Access/availability to convenience/corner stores, farmers market, restaurant, grocery stores/home/ neighborhood Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Price and Availability Indices of Healthy Food (Donkin et al., 2000) Community level To develop and map indices to illustrate variation in the cost and availability of healthy food Administered in person N=194 items; N=199 outlets Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability/ access to food environment, convenience/corner stores, restaurants, grocery/ supermarket, Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Food pricing; Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
GIS Mapping of Indices (Donkin et al., 2000) Community level To develop and map indices to illustrate variation in cost and availability of healthy food; Existing data N=199 outlets in contiguous wards of London Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability/ access to food environment including supermarket, grocery, convenience/corner Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability/ pricing; Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Self-Reported Neighborhood Characteristics (Echeverria et al., 2004) Community level To estimate the reliability of a questionnaire measuring various self-reported measures of the neighborhood environment of possible relevance to cardiovascular disease Researcher-administered face-to-face interviews N=12 items; N=48 participants Reliability – test-retest; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: PA and food environment, neighborhood, supermarket, shopping, facility access, availability, proximity Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Home Fruit, Juice, and Vegetables (FJV) Availability Fruit, Juice, and Vegetables Availability Checklist (Edmonds et al., 2001) Individual level To examine whether median family income and FJV availability in grocery stores, restaurants, and homes in 11 census tracts correlated with FJV consumption 25 items; phone interview N=90 AA Boy Scouts 11-14 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: Male Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability and access to foods at groceries, restaurants, and home Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Home Food Inventory (HFI) (Fulkerson et al., 2008) Individual level–home To develop and validate a home food inventory that is easily completed by research participants in their homes and includes a comprehensive range of both healthful and less healthful foods that are associated with obesity 186 items; self-administered questionnaire N=393; Sample 1=51 adult participants, 6 research staff who independently completed HFI in homes; Sample 2=342 families Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white, multiethnic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Home food inventory availability and access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Home Environment Survey (Gattshall et al., 2008) Individual level–home To develop and test the reliability and validity of a measure of the home environment 186 items; in person or self-administered N=219 Reliability – test-retest, inter-rater, internal consistency; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Food availability and access, policy/practice, facility access/policy Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence, parental modeling Socioeconomic: Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Nutrition Environment Measures Survey in Stores (NEMS-S) for Retail Stores (Glanz et al., 2007) Community level To develop and evaluate measures of nutrition environments in retail food stores; environmental observation 93 items; researcher-administered N=85 stores; 4 neighborhoods in urban area Reliability – test-retest, inter-rater, internal consistency; Validity – face construct Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food availability and access, food quality Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability and pricing; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Hayes Urban Market Basket Survey (Hayes, 2000) Community level To revisit issue of price discrimination of food in poor urban areas 20 items; researcher-administered N=NR, 28 urban zIP codes Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability and pricing of food; Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Measures of Accessibility to Grocery Stores and Fast Food Chains (Helling and Sawicki, 2003) Community level To assess accessibility to personal consumption opportunities across predominantly black, upper-income tracts; GIS protocol N=NR, 10 counties, 25 census tracts Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Facility adequacy, availability, access for full service restaurant, grocery store, fast food restaurant Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Consumer Food Choice and Access Survey (Hendrickson et al., 2006) Community level To determine access to fruits/ vegetables by low-income residents living in selected urban and rural Minnesotan communities; focus groups N=796 low-income subjects from rural and urban communities Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Food availability and access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Food affordability and pricing, Related variables – income, employment/unemployment, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Focus Group Discussion of Food Availability (Hendrickson et al., 2006) Community level To conduct focus group discussions, responses to a consumer survey and an inventory of foodstuffs available at stores located in all the communities and at large grocery stores in neighborhoods adjacent to the urban communities N=41 focus groups; researcher-administered N=396 urban neighborhoods; N=400 rural communities Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Availability and access, food quality Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Pricing and affordability of food; Related variables – income, employment, education Life course exposure: NR
Toddler Parent Mealtime Behavior Questionnaire for Toddlers and Mothers (Horodynski et al., 2010) Individual level To examine maternal demographic characteristics and depressive symptoms as predictors of TV viewing during mealtimes, and investigate how mealtime TV viewing predicts mother and toddler food consumption 4 items; self- or third-party-administered N=199 AA/200 Caucasian, low-income mother-toddler dyads Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Food quality at home Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education, employment status, WIC/ school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Food Availability Survey (Horowitz et al., 2004) Individual level To compare the availability and cost of diabetes-healthy foods in a racial/ethnic minority neighborhood in East Harlem, with those in the adjacent, largely white and affluent Upper East Side in New York City; environmental observation 5 items; researcher-administered N=173 East Harlem and 152 Upper East Side grocery stores Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food availability and access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability and pricing of food; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Family Nutrition and PA Survey (FNPA) (Ihmels et al., 2009) Individual level To develop an easy-to-use screening tool designed to assess family environmental and behavioral factors that may predispose a child to becoming overweight 21 items; third-party-administered N=854 Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Home environment Sociocultural: Family environment/parent/ behavioral factors Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – WIC/school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Community Grocery Store Survey (Inagami et al., 2006) Community level To assess location of grocery stores where individuals shop and its association with BMI were examined; Existing data Researcher-administered N=2,144 low-income subjects Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability and access to grocery stores Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, employment, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Farmers’ Market and Grocery Store Environments in US Counties (Jilcott et al., 2011a) Community level To examine county-level associations among obesity prevalence and per capita farmers markets, grocery, supercenters, adjusted for demographic factors and metropolitan status; existing data N=NR, 3,141 counties across 50 states Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Food availability and access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Food Venue Accessibility for 8 to 18 Year Olds (Jilcott et al., 2011b) Community level A geographic information systems database was constructed by geocoding home addresses and food venues; existing data/GIS protocol N=744 youth and food venues Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food access and availability Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – insurance status Life course exposure: NR
Grocery Store Accessibility Measure (Kaufman, 1999) Community level To assess pricing and access of food available to poor households; GIS protocol N=NR, 36 counties bordering Mississippi Delta Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Food availability and access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability/ pricing; Covariates – pricing/ cost variables; Related variables – income, WIC/ school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Marketing and Availability of Healthy Options in Restaurants (Lewis et al., 2005) Community level To assess the availability, quality, preparation of food, advertisements and promotions, cleanliness, and service in restaurants 62 items; direct observation, researcher-administered N=659 restaurants: 348 in target area, 311 in comparison area Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food quality, restaurant type, access and availability Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability and pricing, labeling point of purchase, marketing/ advertising/promotion Life course exposure: NR
zip Code Comparison of Restaurants in South Los Angeles (Lewis et al., 2005) Community level To examine availability and food options at restaurants in less-affluent versus more-affluent area of Los Angeles County; existing data 62 items; researcher-administered N=659 restaurants Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Access/availability in restaurants, food quality Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Density of Fast-Food Outlets (Li et al., 2009) Community level To examine variation in obesity among older adults relative to the joint influences of density of neighborhood fast food outlets and residents’ behavioral, psychosocial, and sociodemographic characteristics; existing database, GIS protocol N=1,221 residents from 120 neighborhoods Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability and access to fast food Sociocultural: Covariates – psychological variables (self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Neighborhood Vegetation and Proximity to Food Retail Protocol (Liu et al., 2007) Community level To examine relationships between overweight in children and environment factors, including vegetation and food retail locations; GIS protocol N=7,334 subjects 3-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Rural Living and working conditions: Access/availability to stores, groceries, markets and restaurants Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Geographic Assessment of Type and Quantity of Food Stores (Moore and Diez Roux, 2006) Community level To investigate associations between local food environment and neighborhood racial/ethnic and socioeconomic composition N=NR; existing data, Census tracks in Maryland, North Carolina, New York Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability and access to food outlets, stores, markets Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Geographic Assessment of Neighborhood Characteristics and Location of Food Stores (Morland et al., 2002) Community level To examine the distribution of food stores and food service places by neighborhood wealth and racial segregation; existing data (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study) N=NR; 216 census tracts from Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Availability and access to food stores and services Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – home ownership and values Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Community Supermarket and Other Food Stores Measure (Morland et al., 2006) Community level To examine whether characteristics of local food environment are associated with prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors Construction of measure from existing data N=10,763 subjects from 270 census tracts in Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban/rural Living and working conditions: Availability and access to food outlets Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Neighborhood Scale Questionnaire on Food Quality, Safety, Aesthetics, and Social Cohesion (Mujahid et al., 2007) Community level To develop measures of neighborhood environment that are important in cardiovascular disease risk, assess psychometric and ecometric properties and examine individual- and neighborhood-level predictors of measures; Questionnaire 36 items; researcher-administered by phone N=5,988 from Maryland, North Carolina, New York Reliability – test-retest internal consistency; Validity – convergent Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food quality, adequacy, and appeal; aesthetics, traffic and crime/ safety, facility adequacy and appeal Sociocultural: Social environment Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Child Feeding Scale in Turkish Mothers (Polat and Erci, 2010) Individual level To adopt the Child Feeding Scale to assess validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the scale Items: NR; self-administered N=158 mothers Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – construct Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, education, employment/unemployment Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Food Environment, Shopping List Survey (Sloane et al., 2003) Community level To inventory selected markets in targeted areas of high AA concentration in comparison with markets in a contrasting wealthier area with fewer AAs Questionnaire; third-party-administered N=261 stores in Los Angeles target area; 69 in contrast area Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food quality, adequacy and appeal, availability and access, service Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, poverty rates Life course exposure: NR
Food Environment, Healthy Food Assessment Survey (Sloane et al., 2003) Community level To study nutritional environment of an urban area to better understand the role of such resources in residents’ efforts to live a healthy life Questionnaire; third-party-administered N=261 stores in Los Angeles target area; 69 in contrast area Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food quality, adequacy and appeal, availability and access, service Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, poverty rates Life course exposure: NR
Youth Impact Questionnaire (YIQ) for 10 to 14 Year Olds (Surkan et al., 2011) Community level To examine how factors related to the home food environment and individual characteristics are associated with healthy food purchasing among low-income AA youth 38 items; in-person-administered N=206 youth and adults Reliability – NR; Validity – NA Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability, access Sociocultural: Covariates – psychological factors (e.g., self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences), social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education, employment, marital status, material style of life score Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Food Purchasing Patterns for Home Consumption (Yoo et al., 2006) Community level To identify the most common frequency of food-purchasing patterns and relate to characteristics of individuals and families Items: NR; researcher-administered N=823 adults Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Assessment of supermarket, grocery, and convenience stores Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Food Store Characteristics Survey (Zenk et al., 2005a) Community level To examine whether characteristics of retail food stores where AA women shopped mediated association between income and intake of fruit and vegetables; Questionnaire N=266 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability/ access, food quality, assessed grocery store/supermarket Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability, food pricing; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Manhattan Block Distance to the Nearest Supermarket (Zenk et al., 2005b) Community level To evaluate spatial accessibility of chain supermarkets in relation to neighborhood racial composition and poverty; GIS protocol Researcher-administered N=NR, 869 neighborhoods/census tracts in metropolitan Detroit Reliability – NA; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food access and availability Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Fruit and Vegetable Access by Community Racial Composition and Socioeconomic Position (Zenk et al., 2006) Community level To compare fruit/vegetable availability at food stores in four Detroit-area communities: (1) predominately AA, low socioeconomic position (SEP), (2) racially heterogeneous, low SEP (3) predominately AA, middle SEP (4) racially heterogeneous, middle SEP; observational study N=304 food stores located in the four communities Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Food access and availability, quality Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Affordability, pricing Life course exposure: NR

NOTES: AA = African American, AI = American Indian; AN = Alaska Native; BMI = body mass index; F = female; FJV = fruit, juice, and vegetable; HI/PI = Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; GIS = geographic information systems; M = male; NR = not relevant; PA = physical activity; SES = socioeconomic status; WIC = Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

TABLE E-3 Message/Media Environment Measurement Tools and Research Methods

Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Location of Outdoor Food Advertising in Newcastle Upon Tyne (Adams and White, 2011) Community level To explore differences in the prevalence of outdoor food advertising, and type and nutritional content of advertised foods, according to an area-based marker of socioeconomic position in a city in Northern England; GIS protocol with GPS devices Items: NR; researcher-administered in person N=1,371 advertisements in low-income communities Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Marketing, advertising, promotion Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – area based marker of deprivation Life course exposure: NR
Child and Adolescents Televisions Viewing and Ads Survey (Ayala et al., 2007) Individual level To assess dietary intake, and money spent weekly on fast food and snacks with family variables, including food ads seen on television, and parent purchasing food products that children saw advertised on television Items – NR; questionnaire N=167 Mexican American children 6-18 yrs old and their mothers Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: Hispanic Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability/access/fast food TV ads, screen time Sociocultural: Family support for healthy eating, family meals Socioeconomic: Purchasing habits, Related variables – employment/unemployment, education, marital status Life course exposure: NR
Menu Checklist on Healthy Choice Cues (Cassady et al., 2004) Community level To develop and test the Menu Checklist, an instrument to be used by community members to assess cues for healthy choices in restaurants 31 items; in-person administration N=14 restaurants from primarily AA communities Reliability – inter-rater reliability; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Labeling, point of purchase, and food quality, full service/fast food restaurants Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Retail Food Storage Packaging Retail for Youth (Grigsby-Toussaint et al., 2011) Community level, new measure To examine extent to which foods marketed on the Internet and television to youth are also available and marketed in retail food stores, and whether differences exist in the marketing practices across store types and by neighborhood racial composition 78-item survey; self-administered N=118 food stores Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability, access, marketing/advertising/ promotion Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – low-income populations, education Life course exposure: NR
Restaurant Physical Environment Profile (Lewis et al., 2005) Community level To assess the availability, quality, and preparation of food in restaurants and to assess advertisements and promotions, cleanliness, and service for each restaurant 62 items; in person, direct observation N=659 restaurants in 348 areas with 311 comparison areas Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Affordability/ pricing, availability/access, facility adequacy/appeal, food quality, point of purchase/ labeling Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Marketing and Availability of Healthy Options in Restaurants (Lewis et al., 2005) Community level To assess the availability, quality, and preparation of food in restaurants, and advertisements and promotions, cleanliness, and service for each restaurant Researcher-administered in person N=659 restaurants in 348 areas with 311 comparison areas Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Affordability/ pricing, availability/access, food quality, point of purchase/labeling, marketing/ advertising Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
PA and Media Inventory (Sirard et al., 2008) Individual level To develop and test the reliability and validity of a self-report instrument to comprehensively reflect the availability and accessibility of PA 61 items; self-administered N=31 adult participants with a child 10-17 yrs old Reliability – test-retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white, multicultural Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Facility access/ availability/proximity, facility adequacy/appeal/quality, and rooms/PA/media Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education, home ownership Life course exposure: NR
Youth Media Campaign Longitudinal Survey (Welk et al., 2007) Individual level To evaluate the reliability and validity of the PA questions in the Youth Media Campaign Longitudinal Survey (YMCLS), a nationally representative survey of youth 9-13 yrs old Items – NR; researcher-administered N=192 subjects 9-13 yrs old (93 males and 99 females) Reliability – test-retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income, WIC/ free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR

NOTES: AA = African American, AI = American Indian; AN = Alaska Native; F = female; GIS = geographic information systems; GPS = global positioning systems; M = male; NR = not relevant; PA = physical activity; SES = socioeconomic status; WIC = Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

TABLE E-4 Worksite/Healthcare Environment Measurement Tool and Research Methods

Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Environmental and Policy Factors Measure (Catlin et al., 2003) Community level To measure the association between environmental and policy factors (i.e., community perceptions, community infrastructure, and worksite infrastructure) and being overweight; telephone survey adapted from the Missouri Cardiovascular Disease Survey 92 items; interview N=2,871 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Pedestrian infrastructure, aesthetics/ beautification, facility access/ availability/proximity, pedestrian/traffic safety, crime/safety, policy Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education, employment/ unemployment, marital status Life course exposure: NR
Worksite Support of PA and Healthy Food Availability Measures (Crawford et al., 2004) Individual level, new measure To measure staff perceptions of workplace environment, personal habits and health beliefs, and self-efficacy Items – NR; questionnaire; self-administered N=51 Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Workplace environment Sociocultural: Covariates – psychological factors, including self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR

NOTES: AA = African American; F = female; M = male; NR = not relevant; PA = physical activity; SES = socioeconomic status.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

TABLE E-5 School and Child Care Environment Measurement Tools and Research Methods

Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Wisconsin Nutrition and Growth Study (WINGS) Survey for 3 to 8 Year Olds (Adams and Prince, 2010) Individual level To understand the prevalence and contributing factors to pediatric obesity in Wisconsin tribes and provide the foundation for intervention design 7 items; measures of PA by questionnaire N=412 children 2-11 yrs old Reliability – test-retest; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AI/AN Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
School Food Opportunities (Arcan et al., 2011) Individual level To assess dietary behaviors of students attending alternative high schools 12 items; questionnaire; in-person delivery N=145 low-SES youth 12-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic or class: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – WIC/ free reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Nutrition and PA Self-Assessment for Child Care (NAP SACC) (Benjamin et al., 2007) Organizational level To assess the nutrition and PA environments in child care settings 56 items; questionnaire; self-administered N=59 child care center directors and 109 staff Reliability – inter-rater, test-retest; Validity – face, construct, content, criterion Race/ethnicity: NR Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Food availability/ access, quality, policy/ practice, provision nutrition education, policy, crime/ safety, facilities/adequacy/ appeal/quality, aesthetics/ beautification Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
School Commute Scale (Braza et al., 2004) Community level To evaluate neighborhood design and rates of student walking and biking to school 1 item; third-party-administered N=2,993; 34 of 150 California schools participating in Walk to School events Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Commute to work/school Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – WIC/free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Nursery Teachers’ Report on PA of Young Children (Chen et al., 2002) Individual level To test the validity of nursery teachers’ report on the PA of young children Items – NR; third-party-administered N=21 children ages 3-4 in nursery school in Japan and teachers Reliability – NR; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: Asian Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: NR Life course exposure: NR
School Food Environments for 6 to 13 Year Olds (Chiang et al., 2011) Community level To measure the influence of fast-food stores and convenience food stores on growth and body composition in a range of residential densities for Northeast Asian food culture; Questionnaire N=2,283 children in 359 townships/districts of Taiwan Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: Asian Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability/access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income, education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Food Policies a la Carte and Snack Bars (Cullen and Thompson, 2005) Policy level New measure derived from multiple data sources from aggregated sales data; Existing data N= 23 schools, primarily low-income, subjects 12-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Policies/practice related to food group, types of food, foods of minimal nutritional value, sweetened beverages Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC/free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Daily Food Production Records for the National School Lunch Program Meals and Point of Sale Data for Snack Bar Items (Cullen and Watson, 2009) Organizational level To assess the statewide impact of the 2004 Texas Public School Nutrition Policy on foods and beverages served or sold in school GIS methods; existing data N=47 schools in 11 school districts in Texas Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Food production records/average sales data of foods served Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC/free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Fruit, Juice, and Vegetable (FJV) Availability Questionnaire for Students (Cullen et al., 2003) Individual level To examine the relationships among home fruit (F), 100% fruit juice (J), and vegetable (V) availability and accessibility 34 items; child- and parent-focused questionnaires N= 225 4th- to 6th-grade children and their parents (N=88) Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability, access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – education, family composition Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Pathways Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors (KAB) Questionnaire (DeVault et al., 2009) Individual measure To evaluate effectiveness of nutrition component for 4th-grade children in public schools Researcher-administered N=20 4th-grade classes, 140 students Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Covariate psychological factors (e.g., self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences), social influence (e.g., parent modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – WIC/free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Food Checklist for It’s All About Kids Program (DeVault et al., 2009) Individual level To evaluate effectiveness of nutrition component for 4th-grade children in public schools Items – NR; researcher-administered N=20 4th-grade classes, 140 students Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Confidence to participate in PA; Covariates – knowledge, psychological factors (e.g., self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences), social influence (e.g., parent modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – psychological, social variables, WIC/free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Shape Up Somerville Study Physical Activity Questionnaire for Young Children (Economos et al., 2008) Individual level Three school-based questionnaires to assess (a) fruit/vegetable intake, (b) PA and television (TV) viewing, and (c) perceived parental support for diet and PA 6 items; phone, in-person administration N=86 school children Reliability – test-retest; Validity – concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Modified “Fruits and Vegetables You Ate Yesterday” Survey for Shape Up Somerville Study (Economos et al., 2008) Individual level Three school-based questionnaires to assess (a) fruit and vegetable intake, (b) PA and TV viewing, and (c) perceived parental support for diet and physical activity 4 items; phone, in-person administration N=86 school children Reliability – test-retest; Validity – criterion Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Parental Support Questionnaire for Shape Up Somerville Study (Economos et al., 2008) Individual level Three school-based questionnaires to assess (a) fruit and vegetable intake, (b) PA and TV viewing, and (c) perceived parental support for diet and physical activity 3 items; phone, in-person administration N=86 school children Reliability – test-retest; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: Perception of parental support for fruit and vegetables; Covariates – social influence (e.g., parental modeling) Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Healthy Eating, Active Communities (HEAC) Survey for 7th and 9th Graders (Gosliner et al., 2011) Individual level To assess attitudes and behaviors regarding school food environments during spring 2006 138 items; self-administered N=5,365 subjects 12-18 yrs old Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Perceptions of school food environment, availability/access, facility adequacy/appeal Sociocultural: Perception of healthiness; Covariates – psychological factors (e.g., self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences) Socioeconomic: Related variables – low-income students Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
School Wellness Policies for Post-Partum Adolescents (Haire-Joshu et al., 2011) Policy level School Wellness Policy Coding Tool used to assess the strength and comprehensiveness of school district wellness policies from 251 schools attended by participating adolescent mothers Items – NR; self-administered questionnaire N=647 respondents from N=251 schools across 27 states Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Policies related to food and PA environment Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC/free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Home Availability and Accessibility of Fruits and Vegetables – Parent Survey (Hearn et al., 1998) Individual level Surveys of parents and children, food consumption records, and examination of foods served at several schools Number of items and sample size – NR Reliability – Internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Home environment, availability/ access Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – employment/unemployment, education Life course exposure: NR
School Lunch Availability and Accessibility of Fruit and Vegetable Survey (Hearn et al., 1998) Individual level Survey of parents and children, food consumption records, and examination of foods served at schools Number of items and sample size – NR Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Availability and access of foods at school Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
System for Observing Play and Leisure Activities in Youth for Middle Schoolers (McKenzie, 2000) Individual level To directly observe group PA and measure leisure time physical activity of adolescents Number of items and sample size – NR; researcher-administered, direct observation Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – concurrent Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: School facility adequacy/appeal or quality Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) (McKenzie et al., 2006) Individual level To develop SOPARC and test its use by observing 16,244 individuals in 165 park areas Items – NR; researcher-administered, direct observation N=16,244 Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white, multiethnic Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: PA at parks and playgrounds, facility adequacy/appeal or quality Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – income Life course exposure: NR
Principal/Food Service Director Survey of School Food Policies (Neumark-Sztainer et al., 2005) Individual level To examine associations between high school student lunch patterns and vending machine purchases, and school food environment and policies Items – NR; questionnaire N=1,088 high school students Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: NR Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Environment, policy Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
Observational System for Recording PA in Children for Preschoolers (OSRAC) (Pate et al., 2008) Individual level To develop the OSRAC-Preschool Version, to measure PA levels and related factors in 3- to 5-yr-old children in preschools Researcher-administered N=493 children 3-5 yrs old in 24 preschools Reliability – inter-rater; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: NR Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – education Life course exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Objectively Measured Access to Recreational Facilities (Scott et al., 2007) Community level To examine relationship between number and proximity of PA facilities and perceptions; compare objective and self-report measures as predictors of PA; GIS protocol N=1,367 girls Reliability – NR; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: Urban Living and working conditions: Facility access/ availability/proximity Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Perceived Access to Recreational Facilities (Scott et al., 2007) Individual level To examine relationship between number and proximity of PA facilities and perceptions; compare objective and self-report measures as predictors of PA; GIS protocol Self-administered questionnaire N=1367 girls Reliability – NR; Validity – predictive Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: PA environment, recreational facilities Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race Life course exposure: NR
Girls’ Health Enrichment Multi-Site Studies (GEMS) Measures (Story et al., 2003a) Individual level Development of an after-school obesity-prevention program for AA girls; part of the GEMS project to test interventions designed to reduce excess weight gain Self-administered N=54 girls 6-11 yrs old Reliability – internal consistency; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability, access, home environment Sociocultural: Individual variables related to diet, PA, and body image; Covariates – knowledge, psychological factors (e.g., self-efficacy, beliefs, preferences) Socioeconomic: Related variables – low income, education, female headed households, home ownership/ values Life course exposure: NR
GEMS Measure: Low Fat Food Practices (Story et al., 2003a) 25 items
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
GEMS Measure: Obesity Prevention Questionnaire (Story et al., 2003a) Items – NR
GEMS Measure: Weight Control Behaviors (Story et al., 2003a) Items – NR Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Perceived Food Availability Questionnaire (Story et al., 2003a) 31 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Availability of Lower-Fat and Higher-Fat Foods (Story et al., 2003a) 29 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Self-Efficacy for Healthy Food Preparation (Story et al., 2003a) 10 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: GEMS Activity Questionnaire (Story et al., 2003a) 28 items
GEMS Measure: Motivation for Healthy Eating (Story et al., 2003a) 5 items Reliability – internal consistency
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
GEMS Measure: Motivation for Physical Activity (Story et al., 2003a) 2 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Physical Activity Outcome Expectancies (Story et al., 2003a) 17 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Physical Activity Preference (Story et al., 2003a) 17 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Parent Encouragement for Healthy Eating (Story et al., 2003a) 5 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Physical Activity Self-Concept for 8-10 year olds (Story et al., 2003a) 4 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Diet Knowledge for 8-10 year olds (Story et al., 2003a) 6 items
GEMS Measure: TV Viewing Questionnaire for 8-10 year olds (Story et al., 2003a) 4 items Reliability – internal consistency
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
GEMS Measure: Home Environmental Factors Related to Physical Activity (Story et al., 2003a) 5 items
GEMS Measure: Parental Support of Daughters’ Activity Levels (Story et al., 2003a) 6 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Self-Efficacy for Physical Activity and Self-Efficacy for Physical Activity with Daughter (Story et al., 2003a) 9 items and 5 items, respectively Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Self-Efficacy for Healthy Eating (Story et al., 2003a) 9 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Fruit and Vegetable Snack Accessibility in the Home (Story et al., 2003a) 2 items Reliability – internal consistency
GEMS Measure: Healthy Choice Behavioral Interventions (Story et al., 2003a) 12 items Reliability – internal consistency
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
School Lunch Menu and Recipe Survey (Story et al., 2003a) Organizational level To collect 5 consecutive days of school lunch menu items collected from 20 control and 21 intervention schools at 4 time periods; nutrient content analyzed Items – NR; third-party, researcher-administered log N=1,700 AI children Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AI/AN Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Food accessibility, availability, quality, policy/ practice Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – WIC free/reduced school lunch program Life course exposure: NR
School Health Policies and Programs Study Survey (Taber et al., 2011) Community level To assess whether states required or recommended that schools prohibit junk food in vending machines, snack bars, concession stands, and parties from the 2000 and 2006 School Health Policies and Programs Study; state policies collected through computer-assisted telephone interviews or self-administered mailed questionnaires to school personnel and compared with Youth Risk Behavior Survey) GIS methods N=33 states Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, AI/ AN, Hispanic, Asian, HI/PI, white Sex: Female Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Policy/practice Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Related variables – income Length of exposure: NR
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Tool/Method Level, purpose, description, sample size, psychometric properties Population at risk: race/ethnicity; sex; sexual identity; disability; geographic location Social determinants: living and working conditions; sociocultural; socioeconomic; life course exposure
Healthy Food Items Checklist for Elementary School Food Environments (Tester et al., 2011) Community level To survey the range of food outlets around schools and examine how the availability of healthy food in the food stores encountered varies by income status of the school and by store participation in WIC food assistance program; existing data; GIS protocol/detailed description; GIS methods 28 items; environmental observation N=NR, 52 elementary schools and food outlets within network buffer zones Reliability – NR; Validity – NR Race/ethnicity: AA, Hispanic, Asian, white Sex: M/F Sexual identity: NR Disability: NR Geographic: NR Living and working conditions: Availability and access to food quality grocery stores/schools Sociocultural: NR Socioeconomic: Covariates – SES, race; Related variables – low-income population only, WIC, free/reduced school lunch program Length of exposure: NR

NOTES: AA = African American, AI = American Indian; AN = Alaska Native; F = female; GIS = geographic information systems; HI/PI = Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; M = male; NR = not relevant; PA = physical activity; SES = socioeconomic status; WIC = Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 331
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 332
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 333
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 334
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 335
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 336
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 337
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 338
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 339
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 340
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 341
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 342
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 343
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 344
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 345
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 346
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 347
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 348
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 349
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 350
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 351
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 352
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 353
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 354
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 355
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 356
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 357
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 358
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 359
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 360
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 361
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 362
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 363
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 364
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 365
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 366
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 367
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 368
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 369
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 370
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 371
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 372
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 373
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 374
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 375
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 376
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 377
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 378
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 379
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 380
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 381
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 382
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 383
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 384
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 385
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 386
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 387
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 388
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 389
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 390
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 391
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 392
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 393
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 394
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 395
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 396
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 397
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 398
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 399
Suggested Citation:"Appendix E: Disparities Tables." Institute of Medicine. 2013. Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18334.
×
Page 400
Next: Appendix F: National Plan Resources »
Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts: A Plan for Measuring Progress Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $79.00 Buy Ebook | $64.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Obesity poses one of the greatest public health challenges of the 21st century, creating serious health, economic, and social consequences for individuals and society. Despite acceleration in efforts to characterize, comprehend, and act on this problem, including implementation of preventive interventions, further understanding is needed on the progress and effectiveness of these interventions.

Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts develops a concise and actionable plan for measuring the nation's progress in obesity prevention efforts--specifically, the success of policy and environmental strategies recommended in the 2012 IOM report Accelerating Progress in Obesity Prevention: Solving the Weight of the Nation. This book offers a framework that will provide guidance for systematic and routine planning, implementation, and evaluation of the advancement of obesity prevention efforts. This framework is for specific use with the goals and strategies from the 2012 report and can be used to assess the progress made in every community and throughout the country, with the ultimate goal of reducing the obesity epidemic. It offers potentially valuable guidance in improving the quality and effect of the actions being implemented.

The recommendations of Evaluating Obesity Prevention Efforts focus on efforts to increase the likelihood that actions taken to prevent obesity will be evaluated, that their progress in accelerating the prevention of obesity will be monitored, and that the most promising practices will be widely disseminated.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!