We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study aims to identify fathers’ profiles integrating food parenting practices (FPP) and physical activity parenting practices (PAPP).
Design:
We analysed cross-sectional data. The fathers completed the reduced FPP and PAPP item banks and socio-demographic and family dynamics (co-parenting and household responsibility) questionnaires. We identified fathers’ profiles via latent profile analysis. We explored the influence of social determinants, child characteristics and family dynamics on fathers’ profiles using multinomial logistic regression.
Setting:
Online survey in the USA.
Participants:
Fathers of 5–11-year-old children.
Results:
We analysed data from 606 fathers (age = 38 ± 8·0; Hispanic = 37·5 %). Most fathers self-identified as White (57·9 %) or Black/African American (17·7 %), overweight (41·1 %) or obese (34·8 %); attended college (70 %); earned > $47 000 (62·7 %); worked 40 hrs/week (63·4 %) and were biological fathers (90·1 %). Most children (boys = 55·5 %) were 5–8 years old (65·2 %). We identified five fathers’ profiles combining FPP and PAPP: (1) Engaged Supporter Father (n 94 (15·5 %)); (2) Leveled Father (n 160 (26·4 %)); (3) Autonomy-Focused Father (n 117 (19·3 %)); (4) Uninvolved Father (n 113 (18·6 %)) and (5) Control-Focused Father (n 122 (20·1 %)). We observed significant associations with race, ethnicity, child characteristics, co-parenting and household responsibility but not with education level, annual income or employment status. We observed significant pairwise differences between profiles in co-parenting and household responsibility, with the Engaged Supporter Father presenting higher scores in both measures.
Conclusions:
Understanding how fathers’ FPP and PAPP interact can enhance assessments for a comprehensive understanding of fathers’ influences on children’s health. Recognising the characteristics and differences among fathers’ profiles may enable tailored interventions, potentially improving children’s health trajectories.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.