title: Urban-rural comparison of weight status among women and children living in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the weight status of women and children living in socioeconomically disadvantaged rural and urban neighbourhoods in Victoria.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross-sectional study of data collected between August 2007 and July 2008 as part of the Resilience for Eating and Activity Despite Inequality (READI) study. Women aged 18-45 years living in 40 rural and 40 urban socioeconomically disadvantaged Victorian areas were surveyed by postal questionnaire. Data from a subset of their children aged 5-12 years were also analysed. Weight and height were self-reported for women and measured for children.
  
  
  METHODS
  Women's weight status based on body mass index (BMI): underweight; healthy; overweight; or obese Class I, II or III; children's weight status based on International Obesity Taskforce BMI cut-off points.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of 11 940 women randomly selected, 4934 (41%) replied to a postal invitation to participate. After exclusions for various reasons, data were available on 3879 women and 636 of their children. Twenty-four per cent of urban and 26% of rural women were classified as overweight; a further 19% of urban and 23% of rural women were classified as obese. Twenty per cent of both urban and rural children were classified as overweight; a further 10% of urban and rural children were classified as obese. In crude analyses, rural women had higher odds of Class I and II obesity (odds ratio [OR], 1.34 and 1.72, respectively) compared with urban women. After adjusting for sociodemographic factors (age, number of children, country of birth, education level, employment status and marital status), there was no difference between urban and rural women in odds of overweight or obesity Class I, II or III. No significant urban-rural difference in odds of overweight/obesity was evident among children.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The higher prevalence of obesity in rural women compared with urban women was largely explained by individual-level sociodemographic factors, such as age, number of children, country of birth, education level, employment status and marital status. This suggests that higher obesity levels among women in rural areas may be attributable to the sociodemographic composition of these areas.
authors.affiliation: Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC. verity.cleland@deakin.edu.au
authors.forename: Verity
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Cleland
authors.forename: Clare
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hume
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Crawford
authors.forename: Anna
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Timperio
authors.forename: Kylie
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Hesketh
authors.forename: Louise
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Baur
authors.forename: Nicky
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Welch
authors.forename: Jo
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Salmon
authors.forename: Kylie
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Ball
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D015992:Body Mass Index; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009765:Obesity / Q000453:epidemiology*; D015995:Prevalence; D012423:Rural Health / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D014504:Urban Health / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D014739:Victoria; D035862:Vulnerable Populations / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D055815:Young Adult