↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between body mass index and family functioning, family communication, family type and parenting style among African migrant parents and children in Victoria, Australia: a parent-child…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
193 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Relationship between body mass index and family functioning, family communication, family type and parenting style among African migrant parents and children in Victoria, Australia: a parent-child dyad study
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3394-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. Cyril, J. Halliday, J. Green, A.M.N. Renzaho

Abstract

Although childhood obesity prevalence is stabilised in developed countries including Australia, it is continuing to rise among migrants and socially disadvantaged groups in these countries. African migrants and refugees in particular, are at high risk of obesity due to changes in their family dynamics. The aim of this study was to examine the difference between children and parental perception of family functioning, family communication, family type and parenting styles and their relationship with body mass index. A cross-sectional parent-child dyad study was conducted among 284 African families from migrant and refugee backgrounds living in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Bilingual workers were trained to collect demographic, anthropometric and questionnaire data on family functioning, parenting, family type and family communication. Parents and children reported different levels of family dynamics. Children reported a higher prevalence of poor family functioning (61.5 %, 95 % CI: 55.6, 67.2 versus 56.8 %, 95 % CI: 49.7, 61.6) and protective family type (29 %, 95 % CI: 23.9, 34.5 vs. 13.4 %, 95 % CI: 9.9, 17.9), but a lower prevalence of authoritative parenting style (51.6 %, 95 % CI: 45.7, 57.5 vs. 63 %, 95 % CI: 57.5, 68.8) than parents. There was a positive relationship between poor family functioning and child BMI both before (β = 1.28; 95 % CI: 0.14, 2.41; p < 0.05) and after (β = 1.73; 95 % CI: 0.53, 2.94; p < 0.001) controlling for confounders, and an inverse relationship between consensual family type and child BMI after adjustment (β = -1.92; 95 % CI: -3.59, -0.24; p < 0.05). There was no significant relationship between parental BMI and family functioning, communication, family type or parenting style. Children's perception of poor family functioning was associated with childhood obesity. Family interventions to reduce childhood obesity need to adopt an intergenerational approach to promote a clear understanding of family dynamics between children and parents. Unless these intergenerational challenges associated with family dynamics are clearly addressed in obesity interventions, current obesity prevention initiatives will continue to widen the childhood obesity gap in Australia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 193 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 16%
Student > Master 26 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 13%
Lecturer 11 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 59 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 16%
Psychology 22 11%
Social Sciences 18 9%
Sports and Recreations 7 4%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 61 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,261,094
of 23,298,349 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,289
of 15,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,568
of 369,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#257
of 375 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,298,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,189 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 369,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 375 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.