1 / 33

Subjects

Subjects. Experimental Control Total Total Subjects 22 17 39 Gender Males 8 7 24 Females 14 10 15. Subjects. Experimental Control Total Class Level Freshmen 5 9 14 Sophomore 5 1 6

step
Download Presentation

Subjects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Subjects Experimental Control Total Total Subjects 22 17 39 Gender Males 8 7 24 Females 14 10 15

  2. Subjects ExperimentalControlTotal Class Level Freshmen 5 9 14 Sophomore 5 1 6 Junior 6 4 10 Senior 6 3 9

  3. Subjects Experimental Control Total Ethnic Background Caucasian 0 0 0 African-American 15 13 28 “Other” 7 4 11

  4. Results Mean Test Scores Group Pre-Test Post-Test Experimental 5.73±3.34* 14.45±4.8** Control 8.18±3.82 7.82±4.6***

  5. Results 27 Experimental 24 Control 21 18 15 14.5 Mean Correct Responses 12 9 8.2 7.8 6 5.7 3 0 Pre-Test Post-Test

  6. Gender Results 27 Experimental 24 Control 21 $+ 18 16.0* 15 Mean correct responses + 11.75* 12 8.9 7.14 7.85 7.8 9 6.13 5.5 6 3 0 Male Pre- Male Post- Female Pre- Female Post-

  7. Class Level Results 27 Pre-Test 24 Post-Test 21 + 16.3* + 15.6* 18 + 13.5* + 12.2* 15 ean correct responses 12 8.2 7.5 9 2.8** $ 3.6 6 3 M 0 9th 10th 11th 12th Experimental Group

  8. Class Level Results 27 Pre-Test 24 Post-Test 21 18 13.0 15 12.0 Mean correct responses 9.7 12 8.7 8.3 6.8 6.0 9 5.0 6 3 0 9th 10th 11th 12th Control Group

  9. Specific Category Responses • Protein supplements and muscle development (e.g., protein shakes and amino acids) #a %correct %incorrect Pre-Test 6 33.9 65.9 Post-Test 6 64.4 35.7 Improvement + 30.5 a= number of questions on questionnaire in particular category

  10. Specific Category Responses • Vitamin and mineral supplements #a %correct %incorrect Pre-Test 6 16.3 80.3 Post-Test 6 48.5 51.7 Improvement + 32.2 a= number of questions on questionnaire in particular category

  11. Specific Category Responses • Formula drinks (e.g., carbohydrate loading, fluid replacement and medium chain triglyceride [MCT] solutions) #a %correct %incorrect Pre-Test 3 12.1 87.9 Post-Test 3 53.0 47.3 Improvement + 40.9 a = number of questions on questionnaire in particular category

  12. Specific Category Responses • Steroid-alternative supplements (e.g., creatine monohydrate, androstenedione, beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate [HMB], dehydroepiandrosterone [DHEA]) #a %correct %incorrect Pre-Test 8 18.7 81.2 Post-Test 8 48.3 52.1 Improvement + 29.6 a= number of questions on questionnaire in particular category

  13. Specific Category Responses • Weight-loss supplements (e.g., ephedras, chromium picolinate) #a %correct %incorrect Pre-Test 4 18.2 81.8 Post-Test 4 46.6 53.4 Improvement + 28.4 a= number of questions on questionnaire in particular category

  14. Specific Category Responses • Sport supplement safety #a %correct %incorrect Pre-Test 1 36.4 63.6 Post-Test 1 77.2 22.7 Improvement + 40.8 a= number of questions on questionnaire in particular category

  15. Dietary Supplement Use Experimental Group (n = 22) • Vitamin C (23%) • Multivitamins (9%) • Minerals • Iron (9%) • Protein (14%) *Note: results based on subjective responses

  16. Dietary Supplement Use Control Group (n = 17) • Vitamin C (18%) • Minerals • Calcium (23%) • Iron (18%) • Non-vitamin/non-mineral • beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate (HMB) *Note: results based on subjective responses

  17. Discussion • Results for control and experimental groups were low at pre-test and consistent with previous findings • Whether the scores were a result of SES can only be speculated

  18. Discussion • Pre-test low scores may have been attributed to • Questions being to difficult to understand (in particular the updated 7 questions) • Subjects in this population possessing an even greater lack of basic nutrition knowledge

  19. Discussion • Because participation was voluntary, there was no way to assure that subjects would make honest attempts to correctly answer the questions

  20. Discussion • Significant differences at pre-test • Experimental group had a significantly lower score at pre-test (p =0.040) • May have allotted for greater improvement by experimental group • Possibly a result of inability to randomize the sample population

  21. Summary • Effect of sport supplement intervention • Five sessions of nutrition and sport supplement education intervention were effective in improving sport supplement knowledge in adolescents from a low-income community • Consistent with finding from Hartman et al. (1997) in adults from low-income communities

  22. Summary • Gender differences (Experimental group) • Present study indicated no significant difference between gender at pre-test • The improvement at post-test was greater in females than males • Finding does not agree with Massad et al. (1995) and Krowchuk et al. (1989)

  23. Summary • Class level differences (Experimental group) • At pre-test • Freshmen scores lower than seniors’ • Sophomores’ scores significantly lower than juniors’ and seniors’ • At post-test • No significant differences in scores among class levels

  24. Summary Dietary supplement use • Most consumed vitamin/mineral supplements • vitamin C • iron • calcium • Consistent with Kim & Keen (1999) and Lino et al. (1999)

  25. Limitations Sample Size • Limited number of subjects available at NSA • Finding a willing school to participate that fit the grant criteria • Time restraints

  26. Limitations Confounding error • School fire • Considerable subject maneuvering • Loss of subjects (control group) • Possible interaction between groups

  27. Limitations Questionnaire Limitations • Complicated terminology may have hindered the experimental group’s ability to understand certain issues • Subject participation was optional and the investigator was unable to control attendance to educational lessons by the experimental group

  28. Limitations Questionnaire Limitations • Assessing frequency of dietary supplement use • Results based on subjective responses • Likert-type point value system • Difficulty in ascertaining frequency of use

  29. Limitations Sources of Nutrition Information • Prior studies have assessed this information in adolescents from communities of higher income • Present study would have provided suitable comparison for individuals of low-income

  30. Conclusion • A short-term nutrition education program can significantly improve sport supplement knowledge in high school students from a low-income community • Future research is needed to assess long-term effects of nutrition education in low-income communities • Use of more objective measures are also required

  31. Generalizability • Assuming internal consistency, results may be generalized to other high school adolescents in low-income communities

  32. Future Research Implications • Possibility for future research in this needed area is evident • Similar investigation in progress • Incorporating current material into other high school in low-income communities

  33. THANK YOU!

More Related