Obesity risk in rural, urban and rural-to-urban migrants: prospective results of the PERU MIGRANT study
Background: Although migration and urbanization have been linked with higher obesity rates, especially in low-resource settings, prospective information about the magnitude of these effects is lacking. We estimated the risk of obesity and central obesity among rural subjects, rural-to-urban migrants...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International Journal of Obesity 2016-01, Vol.40 (1), p.181-185 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background:
Although migration and urbanization have been linked with higher obesity rates, especially in low-resource settings, prospective information about the magnitude of these effects is lacking. We estimated the risk of obesity and central obesity among rural subjects, rural-to-urban migrants and urban subjects.
Methods:
Prospective data from the PERU MIGRANT Study were analyzed. Baseline data were collected in 2007–2008 and participants re-contacted in 2012–2013. At follow-up, outcomes were obesity and central obesity measured by body mass index and waist circumference. At baseline, the primary exposure was demographic group: rural, rural-to-urban migrant and urban. Other exposures included an assets index and educational attainment. Cumulative incidence, incidence ratio (IR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for obesity and central obesity were estimated with Poisson regression models.
Results:
At baseline, mean age (±s.d.) was 47.9 (±12.0) years, and 53.0% were females. Rural subjects comprised 20.2% of the total sample, whereas 59.7% were rural-to-urban migrants and 20.1% were urban dwellers. A total of 3598 and 2174 person-years were analyzed for obesity and central obesity outcomes, respectively. At baseline, the prevalence of obesity and central obesity was 20.0 and 52.5%. In multivariable models, migrant and urban groups had an 8- to 9.5-fold higher IR of obesity compared with the rural group (IR migrants=8.19, 95% CI=2.72–24.67; IR urban=9.51, 95% CI=2.74–33.01). For central obesity, there was a higher IR only among the migrant group (IR=1.95; 95% CI=1.22–3.13). Assets index was associated with a higher IR of central obesity (IR top versus bottom tertile 1.45, 95% CI=1.03–2.06).
Conclusions:
Peruvian urban individuals and rural-to-urban migrants show a higher incidence of obesity compared with their rural counterparts. Given the ongoing urbanization occurring in middle-income countries, the rapid development of increased obesity risk by rural-to-urban migrants suggests that measures to reduce obesity should be a priority for this group. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0307-0565 1476-5497 |
DOI: | 10.1038/ijo.2015.140 |