Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-9prln Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T11:58:02.034Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Ultra-processed food consumption is related to screen time among Brazilian adolescents, adults and older adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2024

Caroline dos Santos Costa
Affiliation:
Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil
Andrea Wendt
Affiliation:
Graduate Program in Health Technology, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
Adriana Kramer Fiala Machado
Affiliation:
Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil
Luiza Isnardi Cardoso Ricardo*
Affiliation:
MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
André de Oliveira Werneck
Affiliation:
Postgraduate Program in Nutrition and Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Maria Laura da Costa Louzada
Affiliation:
Department of Nutrition, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
*
Corresponding author: Luiza Isnardi Cardoso Ricardo; Email: luiza.ricardo@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated the association between screen time and ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption across the lifespan, using data from the 2019 Brazilian National Health Survey, a cross-sectional and population-based study. A score was used to evaluate UPF consumption, calculated by summing the positive answers to questions about the consumption of ten UPF subgroups on the previous day. Scores ≥5 represented high UPF consumption. Daily time spent engaging with television or other screens was self-reported. Crude and adjusted models were obtained through Poisson regression and results were expressed in prevalence ratios by age group. The sample included 2315 adolescents, 65 803 adults and 22 728 older adults. The prevalence of UPF scores ≥5 was higher according to increased screen time, with dose–response across all age groups and types of screen time. Adolescents, adults and older adults watching television for ≥6 h/d presented prevalence of UPF scores ≥5 1·8 (95 % CI 1·2, 2·9), 1·9 (95 % CI 1·6, 2·3) and 2·2 (95 % CI 1·4, 3·6) times higher, respectively, compared with those who did not watch television. For other screens, the prevalence of UPF scores ≥5 was 2·4 (95 % CI 1·3, 4·1) and 1·6 (95 % CI 1·4, 1·9) times higher for adolescents and adults using screens for ≥ 6 h/d, respectively, while for older adults, only screen times of 2 to < 3 and 3 to < 6 h were significantly associated with UPF scores ≥5. Screen time was associated with high consumption of UPF in all age groups. Considering these associations when planning and implementing interventions would be beneficial for public health across the lifespan.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society
Figure 0

Table 1. Prevalence (%) and 95 % CI of scores of ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption equal to or higher than five on the day before the interview according to age group. National Health Survey, Brazil, 2019 (n 90 846)

Figure 1

Figure 1. Screen time distribution according to age group. National Health Survey, Brazil, 2019 (n 90 846).

Figure 2

Figure 2. Consumption of five or more subgroups of ultra-processed foods (UPF) according to screen time and age groups. National Health Survey, Brazil, 2019 (n 90 846).

Figure 3

Figure 3. Crude (n 90 846) and adjusted (n 90 836) association between screen time and the consumption of five or more subgroups of ultra-processed foods on the day before the interview. National Health Survey, Brazil, 2019. Adjustment: sex, age, skin colour, education level, wealth quintiles, area of residence and geographic region of the country; PR, prevalence ratio.