English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background:  Differences in weight status by socioeconomic position occur during adolescence and is known as weight social gradient (WSG). The PRALIMAP (Promotion de l'ALIMentation et de l'Activité Physique) trial highlighted that a universal intervention was effective in reducing overweight and obesity prevalence among adolescents. However, its ability to reduce the WSG is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the PRALIMAP intervention on the WSG among adolescents.  Methods:  Data were obtained from 3504 adolescents who participated in the school-based PRALIMAP trial between 2006 and 2009. The PRALIMAP study consisted of three interventional strategies: educational, environmental, screening and care. Weight status was assessed by body mass index (BMI) z -score and overweight and obesity prevalence. The "indice de position sociale des élèves" was used to measure adolescents' socioeconomic status. Linear regression and hierarchical models were used to assess the WSG and its evolution, respectively.  Results:  Among all adolescents (14-18 years old), significant WSG was identified at baseline: BMI z -score ( β  = -0.06; p  &lt; 0.0001), overweight and obesity prevalence ( β  = -2.86; p  &lt; 0.0001). Overall, the intervention conferred no significant reduction in the WSG: BMI z -score ( β  = -0.01 [-0.02 to 0.01], p  = 0.48), overweight and obesity prevalence ( β  = -0.01 [-0.07 to 0.05], p  = 0.73). Similar results were observed for adolescents whatever the interventional strategy they benefited from in the PRALIMAP trial.  Conclusions:  This study provided no evidence that the PRALIMAP universal intervention was effective in reducing the socioeconomic inequalities in weight status among adolescents. Different interventions that account for social differences should be considered to tackle these inequalities.

Universal School-Based Intervention Does Not Reduce Socioeconomic Inequalities in Weight Status among Adolescents