A mixed methods analysis of environmental and household chaos: considerations for early-childhood obesity research

7Citations
Citations of this article
56Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Chaos has implications for child health that may extend to childhood obesity. Yet, results from studies describing associations between chaos and childhood obesity are mixed. New approaches to studying the environments of young children may help to clarify chaos-obesity relationships. Methods: We conducted a concurrent mixed methods analysis of quantitative and qualitative data describing home and neighborhood chaos among a diverse cohort of 283 caregiver-toddlers dyads from Ohio. We examined the underlying structure of environmental and household chaos using exploratory factor analysis then sought to validate the structure using qualitative field notes. We generated total scores for factors of chaos and described their distributions overall and according to cohort characteristics. Additionally, we conducted a thematic content analysis of brief ethnographies to provide preliminary construct validity for our indicators of chaos. Results: Dyads varied according to household composition, income, education, and race/ethnicity. We found evidence for a multi-factor structure for chaos, which included disorganization and neighborhood noise. Household disorganization scores ranged from 0 to 7.3 and were on average 2.1 (SD = 1.8). Neighborhood noise scores ranged from 0 to 4 and were on average 1.1 (SD = 1.1). Both disorganization and neighborhood noise were associated with indicators of socioeconomic disadvantage, such as lower educational attainment and household income. Qualitative data from households with high and low scores on the two identified factors were aligned in ways that were supportive of construct validity and further contextualized the social and material environments in which chaos occurred. Conclusions: Chaos represents a complex construct with implications spanning various disciplines, including childhood obesity research. Previous studies suggest challenges associated with measuring chaos may limit the conclusions that can be drawn about which aspect of chaos (if any) matter most of early childhood weight development. We advance the literature by demonstrating chaos may be comprised of conceptually distinct subdomains. Future childhood obesity prevention research may benefit from more contemporary measure of chaos, such as those relying on direct observations that account for a multifaceted underlying structure.

References Powered by Scopus

Using thematic analysis in psychology

110445Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques

5882Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Trendsinobesity and severe obesity prevalence in usyouth and adultsby sex and age, 2007-2008 to 2015-2016

1363Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Contextual Factors and Motor Skills in Indigenous Amazon Forest and Urban Indigenous Children

4Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Functional links between thermoregulation and sleep in children with neurodevelopmental and chronic health conditions

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Adolescents' reports of chaos within the family home environment: Investigating associations with lifestyle behaviours and obesity

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Krupsky, K. L., Parrott, A., Andridge, R., Zvara, B. J., Keim, S. A., & Anderson, S. E. (2021). A mixed methods analysis of environmental and household chaos: considerations for early-childhood obesity research. BMC Public Health, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11936-w

Readers over time

‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

67%

Researcher 2

22%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 3

38%

Social Sciences 3

38%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

13%

Psychology 1

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0