Evaluation of the nutritional status of younger school children

Nikola Radulović ,
Nikola Radulović

Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

Ilona Mihajlović ,
Ilona Mihajlović

Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

Milena Mikalački ,
Milena Mikalački

Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

Nebojša Čokorilo ,
Nebojša Čokorilo

Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

Mila Vukadinović
Mila Vukadinović

Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Novi Sad, Novi Sad, Serbia

Published: 01.06.2015.

Vol 7, No 1 (2015), 2015, 7 (1);

pp. 13-19;

https://doi.org/10.31382/EQOL201501014R

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the nutritional status of younger school children. It included 325 respondents, 196 of which were boys and 129 girls aged 7-11, from the elementary schools in Novi Pazar. Body height and weight were measured in February 2014, based on which the body mass index was calculated. Harrison‘s categorization was used for the evaluation of the degree of nutritional status of the respondents. Data were analyzed by multivariate analysis of variance. The research results show that there is a statistically significant difference in the nutritional status between boys and girls of younger school age (p ≤ .05), i.e. 18.61% of girls and only 12.75% of boys were overweight. The category of lean respondents included 35.72% boys and 24.03% girls. Considering the variables of body weight and body mass index, there were statistically significant difference between the boys and girls (p = .00). The girls had higher numerical values of body mass (30.10kg) than boys (28.07kg), and at the variable of body fat index, it was also observed that girls (21.63kg/m2) recorded higher values than boys (19.97kg/m2). The conclusion is that girls of younger school age have a higher degree of nutrition, higher body weight and body mass index than boys.

Keywords

References

1.
Bibbins-Domingo K, Coxson P, Pletcher MJ, Lightwood J, Goldman L, all. Adolescent overweight and future adult coronary heart disease. Vol. 357, NEJM. p. 2371–9.
2.
Eveleth PB, Tanner JM. Worldwide variations in human growth.
3.
Gibney MJ, Vorester HH, Kok FJ. Introduction to human nutrition.
4.
Grujic V, Martinov-Cvejin M, Ac-Nikolic E, Niciforovic-Surkovic O. Epidemiology of obesity in adult population of Vojvodina. Vol. LVIII, Medical overview. p. 292–5.
5.
Koplan JP, Liverman CT, Kraak. Preventing childhood obesity: Health in the balance. In: Committee on Prevention of obesity in children and Youth.
6.
Kristoforovic-Ilic M. Hygiene-handbook with practicum.
7.
Markovic S, Igrutinovic Z, Kostic G, Vuletic B. Nutritional status and possible factors of etiopathogenesis of obesity in school children. Vol. 1, Medical Journal. p. 7–14.
8.
Power C, Lake JK, Cole TJ. Measurement and long-term health risk of child and adolescent fatness. Vol. 21, Instytuial Journal Obesity. p. 507–26.
9.
Tsigos C, Hainer V, Basdevant A, Finer N, Fried M, Mathus-Vliegen E, et al. In: Management of Obesity in Adults European Clinical Practice Guidelines Obesity Facts.
10.
W.H.O. Measuring change in nutritional status. Guidelines for Assesing the Nutritional Impact of Supplementary Feeding Progranunes for Vulnerable Groups.
11.
Committee WHOE. Physical status: The use and interpretation of anthropometry.
12.
Use and interpretation of anthropometric indicators of nutritional status. Vol. 64, Bull World Health Organ. p. 929–41.
13.
Organization WH, Europe, Yajnik C. The challenge of obesity in the WHO. Vol. 59, Proc Nutr Soc. p. 257–65.

Citation

Copyright

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Most read articles