International Journal of Obesity (2003) 27, 1340–1346

& 2003 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0307-0565/03 $25.00
www.nature.com/ijo

PAPER
Sitting time and work patterns as indicators of
overweight and obesity in Australian adults
WJ Brown1*, YD Miller1 and R Miller1,2
1
School of Human Movement Studies, University of Queensland, Australia; and 2Brisbane Southside Public Health Unit,
Queensland Health, Brisbane, Australia

BACKGROUND: Increasing levels of physical inactivity and sedentariness are contributing to the current overweight and obesity
epidemic. In this paper, the findings of two recent studies are used to explore the relationships between sitting time (in
transport, work and leisure), physical activity and body mass index (BMI) in two contrasting samples of adult Australians.
METHODS: Data on sitting time, physical activity, BMI and a number of demographic characteristics were compared for
participants in two studiesF529 women who were participants in a preschool health promotion project (‘mothers’), and 185
men and women who were involved in a workplace pedometer study (‘workers’). Relationships between age, number of
children, physical activity, sitting time, BMI, gender and work patterns were explored. Logistic regression was used to predict the
likelihood of being overweight or obese, among participants with different physical activity, sitting time and work patterns.
RESULTS: The total reported time spent sitting per day (across all domains) was almost 6 h less among the mothers than the
workers (Po0.001), and compared with the mothers, a significantly greater proportion of the workers was classified as
overweight or obese (BMI Z25 kg/m2). Univariate analysis found that, compared with men in full-time work, women who
worked full-time (OR ¼ 0.42, CI: 0.24–0.74), part-time (OR ¼ 0.35, CI: 0.20–0.59) or in full-time home duties (OR ¼ 0.51, CI:
0.29–0.88) were about half as likely to be overweight or obese. Participants who reported high daily levels of sitting (Z7.4 h)
were also significantly more likely than those who reported ‘low’ levels (o4.7 h/day) to be overweight or obese (OR ¼ 1.68, CI:
1.16–2.42). Multivariate analysis (including physical activity, work patterns and sitting time) confirmed that full-time and part-
time working women (but not ‘home duties’ women) were less likely to report BMI Z25 kg/m2 than full-time working men (full-
time: OR ¼ 0.44, CI: 0.25–0.78; part-time: OR ¼ 0.45, CI: 0.24–0.86), but the OR for BMI Z25 among those in the high sitting
category was attenuated (OR ¼ 1.61, CI 0.96–2.71).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest a need for inclusion of measures of both activity and inactivity in future studies, so that
the complex relationships between these behavioural determinants of BMI can be clarified.
International Journal of Obesity (2003) 27, 1340–1346. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802426

Keywords: body mass index; work; physical activity; motherhood; life-stage; sitting; Australia

Introduction in the development of the current overweight/obesity

The results of the 2001 Australian National Health Survey
indicate that 58% of men and 42% of women are now
overweight or obese, an increase since 1990 of 26% for men
and 31% for women.1 While the underlying causes of
increasing levels of overweight and obesity involve a
complex interplay of inherited, metabolic, lifestyle and
psychosocial factors,2 data from the UK suggest that
increasing levels of sedentariness have played a major role
*Correspondence: Professor W Brown, School of Human Movement
Studies, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
E-mail: wbrown@hms.uq.edu.au
Received 6 November 2002; revised 22 May 2003;
accepted 2 June 2003
epidemic.3
In recent years, measurement of sitting time has gained
some attention in the study of overweight and obesity. Most
studies have however concentrated only on time spent
sitting while watching television or playing computer games.
For example, in 2000, an Australian study found that both
body mass index (BMI) and physical activity patterns were
associated with hours of television watched.4 Several (but
not all) US studies have also shown a strong association
between television viewing and overweight and obesity in
adults, as well as in children.5–8 There have been few
attempts to assess the role of time spent in other sitting
activities (such as in work or transport) in the aetiology of
overweight and obesity.

In this paper, the findings of two recent studies, which
included sitting time questions, are used to explore the
relationships between sitting time, physical activity and BMI
in two contrasting samples of adult Australians. The first
study was a health promotion intervention study with
mothers of young children, conducted in New South Wales
in 1999–2000. Participants were asked about weekly time
spent in different domains of sitting, including travel to and
from work, while at work, and during leisure time activities
such as TV watching, movies and dining out. The second
study was a mixed sex workplace pedometer study, which
also included questions about time spent in these domains of
sitting.
The first aim of this paper was to compare the time spent
in different sitting activities in these two samples. The
second aim was to explore the relationships between sitting
time, physical activity and self-reported BMI in participants
with different patterns of paid work, in order to explore
determinants of overweight and obesity in these Australian
adults.
Methods
Participants
Participants in the first study were 529 women (‘mothers’)
who were participating in an intervention trial, which
involved 21 randomly selected child-care centres in the
Hunter region of NSW, Australia.9 Participants in the second
study were 185 men and women (‘workers’) who were
participants in a workplace pedometer study in Brisbane,
Queensland.
All participants were given a full written and verbal
explanation of the project and all gave written informed
consent to participate. Participants in both studies com-
pleted a survey, which included questions about demo-
graphic characteristics, physical activity, height and weight,
as well as a range of questions about time spent sitting in
various circumstances.
Measures
Demographic characteristics
The workers were asked to report their age, sex, highest level
of education, number of children aged under 5 y and under
18 y and number of hours spent in paid work per week. The
mothers were also asked to report their age, employment
status (full-time paid work, part-time paid work, full-time
home duties) and the age of each of their children.
Sitting time. The mothers were asked to estimate their total
hours spent sitting during the last 7 days:
(a) while travelling to or from places (eg in a car, train or
bus),
(b) as part of your job (eg at a desk/computer),
Sitting time, work and BMI
WJ Brown et al
1341
(c) for recreation (eg watching TV, visiting friends, dining
out).
The workers were asked to estimate hours spent sitting on
an average week day:
(a) at work,
(b) travelling (car, bus, etc),
(c) watching tv/using a computer (not work),
(d) for recreation (eg socialising, movies, reading).
Total sitting times were converted to h/day and cate-
gorised as: ‘low’ (o4.7 h/day), ‘moderate’ (4.7–o7.4 h/day)
or ‘high’ (Z7.4 h/day), on the basis of tertiles of sitting time
derived from a much larger survey (N ¼ 8762) of Australian
women.10
BMI. BMI was calculated from self-reported height and
weight (weight (kg)/height (m2)) and categorised as ‘healthy
weight’ (BMI o25 kg/m2), ‘overweight’ (BMI Z25–o30 kg/
m2) and ‘obese’ (BMI Z30 kg/m2).
Physical activity. Participation in ‘sufficient physical activ-
ity for health benefit’ was derived from questions about time
spent in walking for travel or leisure, moderate-intensity
leisure-time activity and vigorous leisure-time activity. Total
weekly time in minutes reported in these activities (with
time spent in vigorous activities weighted by 2) was
categorised as: none (0–10 min reported), insufficient (410
and o150 min/week) or sufficient (Z150 min/week).11
Data management and statistical analyses
For comparison between samples of each ‘domain’ of sitting
time (work, travel, and recreation), reported time spent
sitting while watching TV or using the computer (not at
work) was added to the reported time spent sitting for
recreation (other) in the workers sample. Between-group
comparisons of sitting time were made using t-tests and
analysis of variance. Further exploration of the sitting time
data was undertaken following amalgamation of the data
from the two samples, and categorisation by work pattern
and gender as ‘full-time men’ (N ¼ 74, all from the workers
sample), ‘full-time women’ (N ¼ 169; 95 workers and 74
mothers) ‘part-time women’ (N ¼ 288; 16 workers and 272
mothers) or ‘full-time home duties’ (N ¼ 183, all mothers).
Relationships between age, number of children, physical
activity and sitting time were explored first for different work
patterns, then for different BMI categories using w2 tests.
(Gender was included in the ‘work pattern’ category as none
of the part-time or home duties workers were men.) Logistic
regression was then used to predict the likelihood of being
overweight or obese (BMI Z25 kg/m2), among participants
with different physical activity, sitting time and work
patterns. All analyses were conducted using SPSS version 10.
International Journal of Obesity
 Sitting time, work and BMI
WJ Brown et al
1342
Results Reported time spent sitting
Demographic characteristics, physical activity and BMI Mean (s.d.) sitting times for each domain in each of the two
Demographic characteristics of the participants are shown in study groups are shown in Table 2. The workers reported
Table 1. There were, as expected, marked differences between approximately double the time spent sitting during travel,
the two groups in terms of sex, age, employment status and four times more time spent sitting at work and about 70%
number and ages of children (all Po0.0001). A significantly more time sitting in leisure time than the mothers. The total
higher proportion of the mothers was classified in the reported time spent sitting per day (across all domains) was
healthy weight range, and a significantly greater proportion almost 6 h less among the mothers than the workers
of the workers was classified as overweight or obese (t(722) ¼ 30.79, Po0.001) (see Table 2a).
(P ¼ 0.017). The proportion of women classified as overweight When sitting time data from both groups were considered
or obese was however similar in the two samples (42.8% of by gender/work patterns (full-time men, full-time women,
the workers and 38.0% of the mothers), and there were no part-time women and ‘home duties’ women), there were
significant differences in the distribution of BMI categories also differences, with full-time male workers reporting the
between the female workers and the mothers (data not greatest mean time spent sitting for travel, at work and
shown). However, despite the lower proportion of workers in for recreation. Among the full-time workers, mean times
the healthy weight range, a significantly greater proportion spent sitting for travel, at work and for recreation were
of the workers (than mothers) was classified as sufficiently significantly lower in women than in men (travel, t(240) ¼
active for health benefit (P ¼ 0.039) (see Table 1). 2.63, Po0.01; work, t(240) ¼ 3.18, Po0.01; recreation,
t(241) ¼ 4.67, Po0.001) (see Table 2b).
Among women, there was a significant relationship
between work status and total sitting time (F(2) ¼ 168.70,
Table 1 Demographic characteristics, BMI and physical activity categories Po0.001), such that those in full-time work reported the
for the participants in each study sample
greatest mean total sitting time, followed by part-time
Mothers Workers workers, with those in home duties reporting the lowest
N ¼ 529 (%) N ¼ 185 (%) mean total sitting time (see Table 2b). Post hoc comparisons
revealed statistically significant differences in sitting time
Sex*** between all three categories of women (full-time vs part-
Male 0.0 40.0 time difference ¼ 4.7 h/day, Po0.001; full-time vs home
Female 100.0 60.0
duties difference ¼ 5.3 h/day, Po0.001; part-time vs home
Age*** (y) duties difference ¼ 0.98 h/day, Po0.01).
18 to 29 20.3 19.6
30 to 44 78.4 41.3
45 to 64 1.3 39.2
Relationships between gender/work patterns and
Highest level of education physical activity, BMI and sitting time
High school Not available 20.5 Relationships between gender/work patterns and age,
Technical college 20.5 number of children, physical activity, BMI and sitting
University 58.9
time are shown in Table 3. There were clear differences
Employment status*** between the four groups in terms of age and number of
Full-time paid work 13.4 91.4 children, with male workers more likely to be over 45 y and
Part-time paid work 50.0 8.6 without children. There were no significant differences in
Full time home duties 36.6 0.0
physical activity patterns between the four groups, but a
Number of children*** much higher proportion of the full-time male workers (than
No children o18 y 0.0 62.7 the other three groups) reported ‘high’ sitting time, and a
At least one child o5 y 92.2 11.9 smaller proportion of male workers was in the healthy
School age children (5–18 y) 7.8 25.4
weight category (see Table 3). Among the women, a
BMI category* (kg/m2) significantly higher proportion of those in full-time work
o25 62.0 50.0 was aged over 45 y (w2(4) ¼ 63.66, Po0.001) and had no
25–o30 22.3 30.4 children under 18 y (w2(4) ¼ 217.81, Po0.001) compared
Z30 15.7 19.6
with women in part-time work and full-time home duties.
Physical activity category* A significantly higher proportion of the women full-time
None 14.1 11.9 workers was in the ‘high’ sitting time category, compared
o150 min/week 37.2 28.6 with the women in the other two groups (w2(4) ¼ 229.75,
Z150 min/week 48.7 59.5
Po0.001).
Asterisks indicate significant differences between groups (w2); *Po0.05;
Univariate analyses showed work patterns, but not age or
***Po0.0001. number of children, to be associated with BMI (see Table 4).
Actual numbers vary slightly due to missing data for some variables. Although the relationship between the categorical sitting

International Journal of Obesity

 Sitting time, work and BMI
WJ Brown et al
1343
Table 2 Mean (s.d.) hours per day spent in different types of sitting activity (a) in the two study groups and (b) for participants with different work patterns

N Travel At work Recreation Total

a
Mothers 529 0.6 (0.57) 1.0 (1.50) 1.9 (1.37) 3.5 (2.20)
Workers 185 1.2 (0.78) 4.9 (2.01) 3.3 (1.44) 9.4 (2.40)

b
Full-time work
Men 74 1.3 (0.85) 4.9 (2.13) 3.6 (1.52) 9.8 (2.37)
Women 169 1.0 (0.71) 3.9 (2.34) 2.6 (1.54) 7.5 (3.38)
All 243 1.1 (0.76) 4.2 (2.32) 2.9 (1.60) 8.2 (3.27)
Part-time work
(all women) 288 0.7 (0.64) 1.3 (1.56) 1.8 (1.27) 3.8 (2.3)
Home duties work
(all women) 183 0.50 (0.46) 0.38 (0.93) 2.1 (1.52) 2.9 (1.89)

Table 3 Proportion of participants (%) in each BMI, physical activity and sitting time category, by work pattern (workers and mothers combined)

Full-time work (Z30 h/week) Part-time work Home duties

(o30 h/week)
Men Women Women Women
N ¼ 74 N ¼ 169 N ¼ 288 N ¼ 183
% % % % w2 (P)

Age (y)
18–29 12.2 22.0 16.8 26.2
30–44 35.1 60.1 80.8 72.3 192.79
45–64 52.7 17.9 2.4 1.5 (0.000)
Number of children
No children o18 years 55.4 41.4 1.7 0.0
At least one child o5 years 12.2 45.6 88.4 92.6 320.06
School age children (5–18) 32.4 13.0 9.9 7.4 (0.000)
Physical activity
None 13.5 14.8 12.3 14.3 9.93
o150 min/week 20.3 35.5 36.2 38.4 (0.128)
Z150 min/week 66.2 49.7 51.5 47.3

Sitting time
Low (o4.7 h/day) 1.4 24.0 68.8 82.9
Mod (4.7–o7.4 h/day) 16.2 21.0 23.4 15.1 345.34
High (Z7.4 h/day) 82.4 55.1 7.8 2.0 (0.000)
BMI kg/m2
o25 39.2 60.5 65.2 56.0
Z25–o30 36.5 22.2 23.5 23.1 20.92
Z30 24.3 17.3 11.4 20.9 (0.002)

Numbers vary due to missing data for some items.

time variable and BMI was almost statistically significant
(P ¼ 0.055), mean total sitting time increased significantly
with BMI category (healthy weight: 4.873.3 h/day; over-
weight: 5.573.5 h/day; obese: 5.973.9 h/day; F(2) ¼ 5.881,
Po0.01). Similarly, while the categorical physical activity
variable did not vary significantly with BMI category in this
analysis, those who were ‘adequately active’ (4150 min/
week) had significantly lower mean BMI (24.675.1 kg/m2)
than those who were sedentary (no activity, 25.77
5.6 kg/m2) or inadequately active (o150 min/week, 25.97
5.2 kg/m2) (F(2) ¼ 5.545, Po0.005). Therefore, physical ac-
tivity, work patterns and sitting time were included in the
final logistic regression analysis.
The logistic regression analyses confirmed that there
was no association between physical activity category and
being overweight or obese (see Table 5). The univariate
analysis indicated that, compared with full-time male work-
ers (mean BMI 27.0 kg/m2, s.d. 5.2), women in full-time
work (BMI 25.3 kg/m2, s.d. 5.5), part-time work (BMI
24.3 kg/m2, s.d. 4.7) and home duties (BMI 25.7 kg/m2, s.d.
5.6) were less than half as likely to be overweight or obese.
Participants who reported high daily levels of sitting

International Journal of Obesity

 Sitting time, work and BMI
WJ Brown et al
1344
Table 4 Relationships between sociodemographic and behavioural variables and BMI (%)

BMI

N o25 kg/m2 Z25–o30 kg/m2 Z30 kg/m2 w2 (P)

Age (y)
18–29 127 60.6 20.5 18.9
30–44 475 60.0 24.0 16.0 5.50
45–64 78 48.7 33.3 17.9 (0.240)

Number of children
No children o18 y 116 53.4 27.6 19.0
At least one child o5 y 482 61.6 22.2 16.2 6.93
School age children (5–18 y) 84 50.0 33.3 16.7 (0.140)

Physical activity category

None 91 60.4 20.9 18.7
o150 min/week 241 53.5 27.0 19.5 5.53
Z150 min/week 350 62.0 23.7 14.3 (0.237)

Sitting time
Low (o4.7 h/day) 356 62.9 23.3 13.8
Mod (4.7–o7.4 h/day) 135 55.6 25.9 18.5 9.25
High (Z7.4 h/day) 176 50.6 27.3 22.2 (0.055)

Work pattern
Full-time paid workFmen 74 7.2 16.2 15.8
Full-time paid workFwomen 162 24.4 21.6 24.6
Part-time paid workFwomen 264 42.9 37.1 26.3 20.92
Home duties (unpaid work) 182 25.4 25.1 33.3 (0.002)

Table 5 Crude and adjusteda odds ratios for being overweight or obese (BMI Z25 kg/m2) by employment status, physical activity and sitting time

N % with BMI Crude odds ratio 95% CI P Adjusted odds ratioa 95% CI P
Z25 kg/m2

Physical activity category

None 91 39.6 1.00 1.00
o150 mintes/week 240 46.5 1.32 0.81–2.15 0.275 1.39 0.83–2.31 0.21
Z 150 min/week 349 38.0 0.94 0.59–1.51 0.800 0.92 0.56–1.51 0.75
Gender/work pattern
Full-timeFmen 74 60.8 1.00 1.00
Full-timeFwomen 162 39.5 0.42 0.24–0.74 0.003 0.44 0.25–0.78 0.005
Part-timeFwomen 264 34.8 0.35 0.20–0.59 0.000 0.45 0.24–0.86 0.016
Home duties workFwomen 182 44.0 0.51 0.29–0.88 0.015 0.72 0.34–1.44 0.348
Sitting time
Low (o4.7 h/day) 356 37.1 1.00 1.00
Mod (4.7–o7.4 h/day) 134 44.4 1.34 0.89–2.00 0.160 1.42 0.92–2.18 0.110
High (Z7.4 h/day) 175 49.4 1.68 1.16–2.42 0.006 1.61 0.96–2.71 0.073

a
Adjusted for each other variable in the model.

(Z7.4 h) were also significantly more likely than those Discussion

who reported ‘low’ levels (o4.7 h/day) to be overweight
or obese (P ¼ 0.006). When each of these three variables
was adjusted for the others in a single model, the adjusted
odds ratios confirmed that women in full-time and part-time
work (but not those in home duties) were less likely to
be overweight or obese, but the significance of the odds
ratio for high sitting time was attenuated (P ¼ 0.073; see
Table 5).
The results of this study indicated that ‘workers’ spend
significantly more time (about 6 h/day) sitting in connection
with travel, work and recreation than mothers of young
children. Moreover, on average, male full-time workers
reported about an hour a day more time spent sitting at
both work and in recreation than women who worked full-
time. In contrast, women in part-time work and full-time
home duties reported significantly lower sitting times for

International Journal of Obesity


travel, work and recreation. The sitting times reported here
are similar to those observed elsewhere for 31 working men
and women who averaged 6.2 (s.d. 2.6)/day.12 To our
knowledge, this is the first time that sitting times have been
measured in a group of young mothers with different work
patterns.
The relationships between the sociodemographic and
behavioural variables provide insight into the complexities
of clarifying the determinants of overweight and obesity in
working adults. Work patterns were clearly associated with
sex, as well as with age and number of children, such that the
full-time workers (both men and women) were older and less
likely to have children aged o18 y. The ‘home duties’ and
part-time women were generally younger and had preschool
age children, reflecting the nature of their recruitment into
the child-care centre health promotion project in which they
were participants (9). Although the inclusion of these two
samples of participants may be seen as a limitation of this
study, the combined data from the two studies allow insights
into patterns of sitting and activity in Australian men and
women.
Physical activity patterns, as determined by these self-
report data, did not vary a great deal among the full-time,
part-time and ‘home duties’ women, but it was apparent that
the men, despite working full-time, were more likely to be
classified as ‘active’. This is probably a reflection of their
participation in more ‘structured’ forms of leisure-time
physical activity which are captured in the activity measure
we used.13 Our physical activity results are in line with
national survey data, which indicate that 59.6% of men and
53.8% of women are sufficiently active for health benefit,
compared with 59.5% of the workers and 48.7% of the
mothers in this study.11
Notwithstanding their higher levels of physical activity,
the full-time male workers were more likely to report high
sitting times, and to be classified as overweight or obese. The
univariate analysis confirmed that gender/work patterns and
sitting time were independently associated with BMI
Z25 kg/m2, such that the full-time working men were more
likely than any of the groups of women to have a BMI
Z25 kg/m2, and men and women reporting high sitting
times were also more likely to be overweight or obese. After
adjustment for physical activity and sitting time, the
changed relationships between these variables in the ‘home
duties’ women may reflect more recent pregnancies, as well
as the reduced time available for structured physical activity
in this group.14 After adjustment, the relationship between
sitting time and BMI was slightly attenuated (P ¼ 0.07),
suggesting that this relationship is confounded by physical
activity. These findings are consistent with those from a large
European Union study, which also found complex relation-
ships between total physical activity, sitting time and BMI in
women.15
Daily sitting time among the full-time working men was
6 h greater than for the women who worked part-time. If the
part-time working women were ‘on their feet’ for these 6 h,
Sitting time, work and BMI
WJ Brown et al
1345
we estimate a minimum weekly difference in energy expen-
diture of about 1410 kcal. (For men, 6 h sitting at 1.5 METs,
for an 82 kg (average weight) man, 5 days/week ¼ 3690 kcal/
week; for women, 6 h ‘light duties’ at 2.5 METs, for a 68 kg
(average weight) woman, 5 days 1 week ¼ 5100 kcal/week.).16
Even if the working men participated in moderate physical
activity for 150 min each week, expending about 800 kcal
(80 kg  4 METS  2.5 h), and the women did not, the work-
ing men’s weekly energy expenditure would still be about
610 kcal less each week than that of the part-time working
women. Recent interpretation of the US National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey has suggested that an energy
imbalance of this order (about 100 kcal/day) is sufficient to
explain the current obesity epidemic.17
A major limitation of this type of simplistic energy balance
speculation is that we did not have any measure of energy
intake in this study. Other limitations of this study include
the non-random selection of the participants, although
comparison of the demographic characteristics of both
samples did show them to be reasonably representative
when compared with similar subgroups of randomly selected
samples. Other limitations of this study include the different
sitting time questions in the two study groups, and the self-
report measures of BMI, physical activity and sitting time.
While the validity and reliability of the physical activity
questions is reasonably good,18 it is known that people tend
to under-report their weight and over-report their height, so
that our estimates of BMI are likely to be low.19 The
reliability of the sitting time items used in our workers’
sample was tested in a sample of 30 workers and found to be
very good (intraclass correlation ¼ 0.71, unpublished data),
but more work is required to assess whether these measures
‘capture’ the unstructured nature of sitting which is typically
seen in mothers of young children and other adults with less
‘routine’ week to week activities.
The findings of this study can only be regarded as a
preliminary exploration of the complex interplay between
physical activity, sitting times and overweight and
obesity. The results presented here suggest that it might be
pertinent to include measures of both activity and sitting
time in subsequent studies, so that the complex inter-
relationships between these determinants of overweight and
obesity can be better understood, and improved prevention
and management strategies can be developed. These pre-
liminary data suggest that a focus on ‘substitution’ of some
sedentariness in transport, at work and in recreation may be
a useful strategy for increasing energy expenditure and
decreasing the continued upward trend in overweight and
obesity.
Acknowledgements
The ‘mothers’ study was funded by the Commonwealth
Department of Health and Aging and the NSW Department
of Health. The ‘workers’ study was funded by the Brisbane
Southside Public Health Unit, Queensland Health. We are
International Journal of Obesity
 Sitting time, work and BMI
WJ Brown et al
1346
grateful to all the participants who made both studies
possible.
References
1 Australian Bureaus of Statistics. National Health Survey 2001.
Australian Bureau of Statistics; Canberra; 2002.
2 National Health & Medical Research Council. Acting on Australia’s
weight. Australian Government Publishing Service: Canberra;
1997.
3 Prentice A, Jebb S. Obesity in Britain: gluttony or sloth? Br M J
1995; 311: 437–439.
4 Salmon J, Bauman A, Crawford D, Timperio A, Owen N. The
association between television viewing and overweight among
Australian adults participating in varying levels of leisure time
physical activity. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2000; 24: 600–606.
5 Tucker L, Friedman G. Television viewing and obesity in adult
males. Am J Public Health 1989; 79: 516–518.
6 Andersen RE, Crespo CJ, Bartlett SJ, Cheskin LJ, Pratt M.
Relationship of physical activity and television watching with
body weight and level of fatness among children. J Am Med Assoc
1998; 279: 938–942.
7 Jeffrey RW, French SA. Epidemic obesity in the United States: are
fast foods and television viewing contributing? Am J Public Health
1998; 88: 277–280.
8 Dietz WH, Gortmaker SL. Do we fatten our children at the
television set? Obesity and television viewing in children and
adolescents. Pediatrics 1985; 75: 807–812.
9 Miller YD, Trost SG, Brown WJ. Mediators of physical activity
behavior change among women with young children. Am J Prev
Med 2002; 23: 98–103.
International Journal of Obesity
10 Ball K, Brown W, Crawford D. Who does not gain weight?
Prevalence and predictors of weight maintenance in young
women. Int J Obesity Relat Metab Disord 2002; 26: 1570–1578.
11 Armstrong T, Bauman A, Davies J. Physical activity patterns of
Australian adults. Results of the 1999 National Physical Activity
Survey. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare: Canberra;
2000.
12 Welk GJ, Differding JA, Thompson RW, Blair SN, Dziura J, Hart P.
The utility of the Digi-walker step counter to assess daily physical
activity patterns. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: S481–S488.
13 Ainsworth BE. Challenges in measuring physical activity in
women. Exerc Sports Sci Rev 2000; 28: 93–96.
14 Brown PR, Brown WJ, Miller YD. Perceived constraints and social
support for active leisure among mothers with young children.
Leisure Sci 2001; 23: 131–144.
15 Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Martinez JA, Hu F, Gibney MJ, Kearney J.
Physical inactivity, sedentary lifestyle and obesity in the
European Union. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999; 23:
1192–1202.
16 Ainsworth BE, Haskell W, Whitt MC, Irwin ML, Swartz AM, Strath
SJ. Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity
codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32:
S498–S516.
17 Hill JO, Wyatt HR, Reed GW, Peters JC. Obesity and the
environment: where do we go from here? Science 2003; 299:
853–855.
18 Washburn RA, Heath GW, Jackson AW. Reliability and validity
issues concerning large-scale surveillance of physical activity. Res
Q Exerc Sport 2000; 71: 104–113.
19 Flood V, Webb K, Lazarus R, Pang G. Use of self-report to monitor
overweight and obesity in populations: some issues for con-
sideration. Aust NZ J Public Health 2000; 24: 96–99.