Abstract Snacking prevalence in all age groups has increased across the globe over the years. Adolescents are a vulnerable population for unhealthy snacking and can be the ideal target group for early nutrition interventions for behavioral changes. Objective: To assess the snacking behavior, its determinants and its association with nutritional status among students of Grade 6–9 in schools of Galle Municipality area. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 540 early adolescents in Grades 6–9 of Government schools in Galle Municipality area, recruited using multistage cluster sampling. A pre-tested, self-administered questionnaire was used. Associations were assessed using Chi-square test. Results: The prevalence of snacking in the sample was 96.1% and the prevalence of unhealthy snacking was 22.2%. Snacks were taken 1–2 times a day in 81.8%. Snacks were chosen by themselves (38.5%) and in 50.2% the reason was the perceived “healthiness” of the snacks. The evening was the preferred snacking time (49.1%), the context was teatime (62.8%), followed by watching TV (43.0%). The popular snacks were biscuits (43.7%), chips (31.9%) and pastries (22.2%). Nearly 90% replaced main meals with a snack. Significant associations of unhealthy snacking snacking at tea time (p = 0.032) were found. Associations were not significant between unhealthy snacking and gender, parental education status or other contextual factors such as place of stay, and mode of travelling (p > 0.05). The association of Nutritional status and unhealthy snacking was not significant (p > 0.05). Conclusions and recommendations: Snaking behaviour is common among almost all adolescents. Unhealthy snacking is less prevalent and shows associations with income and availability/use of pocket money for snacks. Nutrition interventions should be conducted focusing on adolescents as well as families to change unhealthy snacking behavior.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amali Maheshika Thrimavithana (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: