Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Feb 25:14:200.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-200.

Post-intervention effects on screen behaviours and mediating effect of parental regulation: the HEalth In Adolescents study--a multi-component school-based randomized controlled trial

Ingunn H Bergh  1 , Maartje M van Stralen, Mona Bjelland, May Grydeland, Nanna Lien, Knut-Inge Klepp, Sigmund A Anderssen, Yngvar Ommundsen
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Post-intervention effects on screen behaviours and mediating effect of parental regulation: the HEalth In Adolescents study--a multi-component school-based randomized controlled trial

Ingunn H Bergh et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: To improve effectiveness of future screen behaviour interventions, one needs to know whether an intervention works via the proposed mediating mechanisms and whether the intervention is equally effective among subgroups. Parental regulation is identified as a consistent correlate of screen behaviours, but prospective evidence as well as the mediation role of parental regulation is largely lacking. This study investigated post-intervention main effects on screen behaviours in the HEIA-intervention--a Norwegian school-based multiple-behaviour study, as well as mediation effects of parental regulation by adolescents' and parents' report. In addition, moderating effects of gender and weight status on the intervention and mediating effects were explored.

Methods: Participating schools were randomized to control (n=25) or intervention (n=12) condition. Adolescents (n=908 Control; 510 Intervention) self-reported their weekday and weekend TV-viewing and computer/game-use. Change in adolescents' behaviours was targeted through school and parents. Adolescents, mothers (n=591 Control; 244 Interventions) and fathers (n=469 Control; 199 Intervention) reported parental regulation of the screen behaviours post-intervention (at 20 month). The product-of-coefficient test using linear regression analysis was conducted to examine main and mediating effects.

Results: There was no intervention effect on the screen behaviours in the total sample. Gender moderated effect on weekend computer/game-use, while weight status moderated the effect on weekday TV-viewing and computer/game-use. Stratified analyses showed a small favourable intervention effect on weekday TV-viewing among the normal weight. Parental regulation did not mediate change in the screen behaviours. However, stronger parental regulation was associated with less TV-viewing and computer/game-use with effects being conditional on adolescents' versus parental reports. Parental regulation of the screen behaviours, primarily by the parental report, was associated with change in the respective behaviours.

Conclusion: Multiple behaviour intervention may not affect all equally well, and the effect may differ by weight status and gender. In future interventions parents should be encouraged to regulate their adolescents' TV-viewing and computer/game-use on both weekdays and weekends as parental regulation was identified as a determinant of these screen behaviours. However, future intervention studies may need to search for more effective intervention strategies targeting parental regulation.

Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98552879.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of recruitment, randomization, consent received and participants in the HEIA study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Conceptual model of moderation of a mediated effect.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lobstein T, Baur L, Uauy R. Obesity in children and young people: a crisis in public health. Obes Rev. 2004;5(Suppl 1):4–104. - PubMed
    1. Han JC, Lawlor DA, Kimm SY. Childhood obesity. Lancet. 2010;375:1737–1748. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60171-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brug J, Van Stralen MM, Te Velde SJ, Chinapaw MJ, De BI, Lien N, Bere E, Maskini V, Singh AS, Maes L, Moreno L, Jan N, Kovacs E, Lobstein T, Manios Y. Differences in Weight Status and Energy-Balance Related Behaviors among Schoolchildren across Europe: The ENERGY-Project. PLoS One. 2012;7:e34742. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034742. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown T, Summerbell C. Systematic review of school-based interventions that focus on changing dietary intake and physical activity levels to prevent childhood obesity: an update to the obesity guidance produced by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Obes Rev. 2009;10:110–141. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2008.00515.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. van Grieken A, Ezendam NP, Paulis WD, van der Wouden JC, Raat H. Primary prevention of overweight in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of interventions aiming to decrease sedentary behaviour. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9:61. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-61. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data