Abstract
Background
Lower physical activity (PA) has been observed in females compared to males among preschool-aged and older children. However, the timing of when the sex gap emerges is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether females have lower PA levels than males in the early toddler age and to explore whether gross motor competency and PA parenting practices might explain a sex difference in PA.
Methods
The study design was cross-sectional. Participants were a community-based sample of 137 children aged 10–16 months residing in US Midwest urban/suburban area. Participants’ mothers completed a survey that contained a demographic questionnaire, the Ages and Stages Questionnaire gross motor competency subscale, and a PA parenting practices questionnaire. Participating children wore an ActiGraph accelerometer on their hip for 7 days. Accelerometer-measured time spent in moderate- and vigorous intensity PA (MVPA; minutes/day) and in total PA (minutes/day) were calculated. Multivariable linear regression analysis was conducted to predict MVPA and total PA by sex, gross motor competency, PA parenting practices, and socioeconomic status.
Results
Among 137 participants (54.0% female), average age was 13.6 months (SD = 1.7). MVPA was 72 ± 25 and 79 ± 26 minutes/day for females and males, respectively (p = 0.14). Total PA was 221 ± 48 and 238 ± 47 minutes/day for females and males, respectively (p = 0.04). Both gross motor competency and PA-encouraging parenting practices were positively associated MVPA (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively) and total PA (p = 0.02 and p = 0.01, respectively); however, these relationships did not differ by sex (p = 0.11 and p = 0.89, respectively). After accounting for gross motor competency and PA parenting practices, total PA was 15 minutes/day lower among females than males (p = 0.04).
Conclusions
This cross-sectional study of US children observed a sex gap in total PA at 10–16 months of age. Gross motor development and PA parenting practices did not differ by child sex nor explain the sex difference in PA. A longitudinal investigation should follow to further narrow down when sex differences in PA emerge and to determine the factors that lead to this difference.
INTRODUCTION
Physical activity (PA) is a key health behavior for preventing obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.1 However, physical inactivity is prevalent across US populations.1 Given that physical inactivity tends to track over time,2 it is especially alarming that a substantial proportion of preschoolers aged 3 and 4 years are not sufficiently physically active.3–6 In particular, lower PA has been observed in females than males across countries and socioeconomic classes.7,8 A pooled analysis of 14 studies found that on average females performed 17% less total PA than males in youth samples aged 4–18 years from western countries.9 A review6 of 36 studies demonstrated a clear sex gap in PA levels among preschool-aged children across many countries. However, the timing of when this sex gap begins is yet unclear as PA development at infancy and toddler ages has only recently begun to be investigated.10 Among the few existing studies, while an infant study reported no sex differences in PA,11 some toddler studies,12 but not all,13,14 found significant sex differences in PA. Taken together, the sex gap in PA may begin to emerge in late infancy or early toddler ages.
Understanding the factors underlying a sex gap in PA among young children is important to guide intervention strategies. Previous studies have investigated several possible explanations for the sex differences in PA among school-aged and older children, including developmental, parental, and environmental factors.15–17 At 1 year of age, most children are expected to reach important milestones for PA, such as walking and throwing a ball. Gross motor skills are viewed as the building blocks and foundation of these PA milestones.18 In an early childhood context, gross motor development is the development of larger muscles that enable a child to hold his/her head up, sit, crawl, and eventually walk, run, and skip. Gross motor skill competence has been shown to be associated with PA in early childhood,19–21 including in 2-year-old children.22 In addition, parents play a crucial role in setting young children’s routines, limits, and physical environment.23 A sex difference in parental support for child PA has been observed among older children.15,24 However, it is unknown whether a sex difference in PA, if existing, could be explained by gross motor development and PA parenting practices around 1 year of age when a child begins to walk independently.
To address these research gaps, the primary aim of this study was to compare PA levels between females and males at approximate age 12 months in a sample of children residing in the US Midwest area. We hypothesized that females are less active than males at approximate age 12 months. The exploratory aim was to investigate whether gross motor competency and PA parenting practices explain a sex difference in PA.
METHODS
Study Sample
The study sample was Child and Mother Physical Activity Study (CAMPAS) participants. CAMPAS is a longitudinal study aiming to develop an accelerometer-based activity recognition algorithm for toddlers and compare PA development trajectories from age 1 to 3 years between females and males. The eligibility criteria for child participants included being age 10 to 15 months at baseline assessment, having no cerebral palsy or other medical conditions precluding physical movement, and residing in the Chicago metropolitan area. The eligibility criteria for mother participants included being age 18 years or older, speaking and understanding English or Spanish, and living with the participating child at least 50% of the time. Recruitment flyers were distributed to various community organizations and locations, such as pediatric clinics, commercial indoor child playrooms, park districts, childcare centers, and libraries. Recruitment emails were also sent to potentially eligible individuals who were identified from a local healthcare patient electronic database. Detailed recruitment methods and study protocol are available in our previous publication.25 Participants were recruited between August 2022 and March 2024. Data collection was conducted in-person in multiple public locations across the Chicago metropolitan area (e.g., child indoor playrooms) as well as remotely. During a study visit, mothers completed a REDCap-based survey.
Outcomes
Outcome variables included MVPA (minutes/day) and total PA (light or higher-intensity PA; minutes/day).12,26 These variables were derived from ActiGraph wGT3X-BT accelerometer data. Mothers were given verbal instructions on their child’s accelerometer wear during an in-person or virtual study visit. Participants received an accelerometer package that contained an accelerometer with an adjustable waist belt, an instruction sheet, a wear log sheet, and a prepaid envelope during an in-person visit or via United States Postal Service mail. Mothers were asked to assist their child in an accelerometer wear for 7 days and 24 hours and complete the wear log. Upon 7-day wear completion, mothers returned the accelerometer package via an in-person pickup by research staff or USPS mail. Accelerometer data were downloaded and reintegrated in a 15-second epoch using the ActiLife software version 6.14. Because an accelerometer data reduction standard for toddlers has not been established, we adopted the following data reduction method that were used in previous toddler and preschooler studies. We extracted data collected between 6 AM and 10 PM.27–29 Non-wear time, defined as ≥ 20 consecutive zero counts,12,26,30,31 was excluded. A valid wear day was defined as a day with ≥ 480 wear minutes of accelerometer data between 6AM and 10PM.11,13,30 At least 4 valid wear days were required to ensure ≥ 80% reliability.13 Participants who had fewer than 4 valid wear days were asked to re-wear an accelerometer.13,26,32 Light intensity was defined as 25–417 counts per 15 seconds and Moderate or higher intensity was defined as >417 counts per 15 seconds.26,33 Daily accumulated minutes spent in LPA and MVPA were calculated. Total PA was calculated by summing daily minutes spent in LPA and MVPA.12,26
Exposures
The primary exposure of interest was biologically assigned sex, as reported by mothers in the study survey. The exposures for the exploratory aim were gross motor competency and PA parenting practices. Gross motor competency was assessed using mother-reported Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) gross motor subscale responses.34 ASQ gross motor subscale contained 6 items with three response options (yes = 10; sometimes = 5; not yet = 0). The item scores were summed to calculate a gross motor subscale score, which was used to assign the child into three categories: above the cutoff (the child’s development appears to be on schedule), close to the cutoff (the child needs learning activities and monitoring), and below the cutoff (the child may need further assessments with a professional).34 The cutoff scores were used as defined in ASQ scoring guides. In the current report, we combined “close to the cutoff” and “below the cutoff” categories as lower gross motor competency. We considered “above the cutoff” as higher gross motor competency.
Parenting practices regarding PA were assessed using the Preschooler Physical Activity Parenting Practices (PPAPP) questionnaire.35 Examples of the 16 PA-encouraging question items included: “How often do you… a) play active games with your child (such as playing ball or racing)?; b) take your child to the park?; c) go on a walk with your child?; and d) say positive things to motivate your child to be more active?” Examples of the 11 PA-discouraging question items included: “How often do you… a) allow your child to watch TV for long periods of time?; b) drive your child, when it was easy to walk?; c) tell your child he/she will get hurt if he/she plays actively?” Each item was rated in a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never; 2 = rare; 3 = sometimes; 4 = often; 5 = always). Scores from the 16 PA-encouraging parenting practices items were averaged. The PA-encouraging parenting practices score was then split at the median (lower PA encouraging: <3.7; higher PA encouraging: ≥3.7). The PA-discouraging parenting practices score was calculated by averaging the scores from three subscales: the 3-item Promote Screen Time subscale; the 3-item Promote Inactivity subscale; and the 5-item Psychological Control subscale. The PA-discouraging parenting practices score was then split at the median (lower PA-discouraging: <1.9; higher PA-discouraging: ≥1.9).
Other Variables
To account for multi-dimensional Social Determinants of Health,36 we considered Child Opportunity Index (COI).37 COI is a composite index measured at a census tract level that captures neighborhood resources and conditions that matter for children’s healthy development.37 Using the COI 3.0 database matched with participants’ residential addresses, each participant was assigned to one of the five Chicago metropolitan COI categories: very low, low, moderate, high and very high. They were then recategorized into very low or low, moderate, and high or very high.
The following potential covariates were considered based on the literature: child’s racial and ethnic background, maternal education, maternal employment, maternal marital status, childcare attendance, and the presence of siblings in household.11,12,30 In the study survey, mothers reported child ethnicity and race (Hispanic, non-Hispanic Asian, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic multi-race, vs. non-Hispanic White), childcare attendance (yes vs. no), maternal education (4-year college degree or higher vs. less than 4-year college), maternal employment (full-time, part-time vs. not employed), marital status (married vs. non-married), and the presence of young (0–5 years old) and old (6–17 years old) siblings (yes vs. no).
In addition, we considered two growth and developmental factors as potential covariates: weight-for-length percentile and ability to walk independently. Mothers provided a copy of the child’s most recent clinic visit summary that contained a date of visit as well as length and weight measurements. World Health Organization weight-for-length percentile38 was calculated based on the anthropometry measurements, which was then dichotomized into < 85 and ≥ 85th percentile.39 Mothers also reported whether the participating child was able to walk independently in the survey (yes vs. no).
Power Consideration
Statistical power for the primary aim was calculated to detect an effect size of 0.5 standard deviation (SD) (e.g., 10 minutes/day of MVPA difference between males and females at a SD of 20 minutes/day). Priori power analysis indicated that a sample size of 126, with a goal of recruiting 50% female, would provide 80% power to detect a 0.5 SD effect size at a significance level of 0.05 using in two-sample t-test (two-sided).
Statistical analysis
All analyses were conducted in SAS 9.4 (Cary, NC). A significance level was set at 0.05 (two-sided). Descriptive analyses were conducted. Normality of the outcome variables were evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk tests. Bivariate analyses (i.e., t-tests and Analysis of Variance) were conducted to compare the PA outcome variables by sex, COI, gross motor competency, PA parenting practices, and potential covariates. To achieve the exploratory aim, we conducted Chi-square tests to compare the distribution of the gross motor and PA parenting practice categories between males and females.
To achieve the primary aim, multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to compare MVPA and total PA by sex, gross motor competency, and PA parenting practice variables, adjusted for COI categories. We additionally included other potential covariates that were found to have p-value < 0.10 in bivariate analyses. We tested the interaction terms between sex and gross motor competency and between sex and PA parenting practices.
RESULTS
A total of 137 participants (74 females; 54.0%) completed baseline assessment. Due to visit scheduling issues (e.g., rescheduling), 7 participants turned 16 months at baseline assessment. Average age of child participants was 13.6 months (SD = 1.7). Mothers’ average age was 34.5 years (SD = 4.2). None of the study variables had a missing value. Average number of valid monitor wear days was 6.6 days (SD = 0.9), and average monitor wear hours were 14.6 hours/day (SD = 1.6) between 6AM and 10PM. Average MVPA was 75 minutes/day (SD = 25), and average total PA was 229 minutes/day (SD = 48).
Table 1 presents PA levels by sex and other variables. On average, females engaged in 72 ± 25 minutes/day of MVPA compared to 79 ± 26 minutes/day for males (p = 0.14). Females on average engaged in 221 ± 48 minutes/day of total PA compared to males at 238 ± 47 minutes/day (p = 0.04). Twenty-two percent of the sample were categorized as lower gross motor competency. The following PA-supportive parenting practice items had an average score of 4 or higher (often or always): “go on a walk with the child”; “set aside time for active play”; “teach the child that being active is good for his/her health”; and “have outdoor toys available for the child” (data not shown).
Table 1.
Comparison of physical activity by sex and other participant characteristics
| Sample size | MVPA (minutes/day) | p | Total PA (minutes/day) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | mean ± SD | mean ± SD | |||
| Total | 137 | 75 ± 25 | NA | 229 ± 48 | NA |
| Sex | 0.14 | 0.04 | |||
| Female | 74 | 72 ± 25 | 221 ± 48 | ||
| Male | 63 | 79 ± 26 | 238 ± 47 | ||
| Maternal education | 0.83 | 0.74 | |||
| < 4-year college degree | 17 | 74 ± 33 | 225 ± 65 | ||
| ≥ 4-year college degree | 120 | 75 ± 24 | 229 ± 45 | ||
| Maternal employment | 0.06 | 0.09 | |||
| Full-time employed | 79 | 71 ± 26 | 221 ± 49 | ||
| Part-time employed | 23 | 82 ± 21 | 240 ± 34 | ||
| Not employed | 35 | 81 ± 25 | 239 ± 50 | ||
| Maternal marital status | 0.71 | 0.82 | |||
| Married | 113 | 75 ± 26 | 229 ± 48 | ||
| Not married | 73 ± 22 | 227 ± 48 | |||
| Race and ethnicity | 0.61 | 0.86 | |||
| Hispanic | 23 | 72 ± 30 | 226 ± 60 | ||
| Non-Hispanic Asian | 12 | 81 ± 23 | 240 ± 49 | ||
| Non-Hispanic Black | 11 | 78 ± 21 | 234 ± 47 | ||
| Non-Hispanic White | 87 | 74 ± 25 | 226 ± 44 | ||
| Non-Hispanic other | 4 | 89 ± 34 | 250 ± 59 | ||
| Presence of a sibling aged 0–5 years | 0.03 | 0.02 | |||
| Yes | 68 | 80 ± 26 | 238 ± 47 | ||
| No | 69 | 70 ± 24 | 219 ± 47 | ||
| Presence of a sibling aged 6–17 years | 0.80 | 0.52 | |||
| Yes | 28 | 76 ± 29 | 234 ± 51 | ||
| No | 109 | 75 ± 25 | 227 ± 47 | ||
| Childcare attendance | 0.85 | 0.87 | |||
| Yes | 51 | 75 ± 25 | 228 ± 45 | ||
| No | 86 | 75 ± 26 | 229 ± 50 | ||
| Media screen exposure | 0.59 | 0.60 | |||
| Yes | 82 | 76 ± 27 | 231 ± 51 | ||
| No | 54 | 74 ± 23 | 226 ± 43 | ||
| Child Opportunity Index | 0.12 | 0.20 | |||
| Very low or low | 30 | 67 ± 27 | 215 ± 58 | ||
| Moderate | 26 | 75 ± 28 | 230 ± 56 | ||
| Hight or very high | 80 | 78 ± 23 | 234 ± 40 | ||
| Weight-for-height percentile | 0.50 | 0.39 | |||
| < 85th percentile | 90 | 77 ± 26 | 233 ± 46 | ||
| ≥ 85th percentile | 38 | 74 ± 25 | 225 ± 47 | ||
| Walking independently | 0.52 | 0.03 | |||
| Yes | 83 | 74 ± 23 | 236 ± 44 | ||
| No | 54 | 77 ± 29 | 218 ± 51 | ||
| Gross motor competency | 0.14 | 0.003 | |||
| Higher | 106 | 69 ± 27 | 206 ± 49 | ||
| Lower | 30 | 77 ± 25 | 236 ± 46 | ||
| PA-encouraging parenting practices score | 0.01 | 0.02 | |||
| Higher | 60 | 82 ± 25 | 239 ± 47 | ||
| Lower | 77 | 70 ± 25 | 220 ± 47 | ||
| PA-discouraging parenting practices score | 0.59 | 0.55 | |||
| Higher | 66 | 74 ± 25 | 226 ± 48 | ||
| Lower | 71 | 76 ± 26 | 231 ± 48 |
M ± SD, mean ± standard deviation; MVPA, moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity; PA, physical activity; NA, not applicable.
Results of the exploratory aim.
Children with higher gross motor competency had higher total PA, compared to those with lower gross motor competency (p = 0.003; Table 1). Children whose parents had higher PA-encouraging parenting practice scores had higher MVPA and total PA (p = 0.03 and p = 0.02, respectively), compared to those with lower scores. PA-discouraging parenting practice scores were not associated with MVPA or total PA. Sixteen percents of males and 27% of females were categorized as having lower gross motor competency; the proportions were not statistically significantly different (p = 0.11; Table 2). PA-encouraging and PA-discouraging parenting practices did not differ by sex (p = 0.93 and p = 0.75, respectively).
Table 2.
Gross motor competency and physical activity parenting practices by sex
| Female | Male | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | ||
| Gross motor competency | 0.11 | ||
| Higher | 53 (73) | 53 (84) | |
| Lower | 20 (27) | 10 (16) | |
| PA-encouraging parenting practices score | 0.89 | ||
| Higher | 32 (43) | 28 (44) | |
| Lower | 42 (57) | 35 (56) | |
| PA-discouraging parenting practices score | 0.82 | ||
| Higher | 31 (49) | 35 (47) | |
| Lower | 32 (51) | 39 (53) |
PA, physical activity.
Results of the primary aim.
After adjusting for the covariates, a sex difference in total PA was estimated as 15 minutes (p = 0.03; Table 3). A sex difference in MVPA was estimated as 6 minutes; however, it was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). Higher gross motor competency was associated with 13 minutes/day higher MVPA (p = 0.02) and 25 minutes higher total PA (p = 0.01). Higher PA-encouraging parenting practice scores were significantly associated with 11 minutes higher MVPA (p = 0.01) and 18 minutes higher total PA (p = 0.02). No significant interactions were found between sex and gross motor competency or between sex and PA parenting practices.
Table 3.
Multivariable linear regression models for moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity and total physical activity
| MVPA (minutes/day) | Total PA (minutes/day) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient (95% CI) | p | Coefficient (95% CI) | p | |
| Intercept | 64 (52, 77) | < 0.01 | 192 (170, 214) | < 0.001 |
| Sex | ||||
| Female | −6 (−14, 2) | 0.16 | −15 (−29, −1) | 0.04 |
| Male | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
| Maternal employment | ||||
| Not employed | 9 (−0.5, 18) | 0.06 | 17 (0, 34) | 0.05 |
| Part-time employed | 6 (−6, 17) | 0.33 | 13 (−7, 33) | 0.21 |
| Full-time employed | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
| Child Opportunity Index | ||||
| Very low or low | −12 (−22, −2) | 0.02 | −20 (−38, −1) | 0.04 |
| Moderate | −3 (−13, 8) | 0.59 | 1 (−18, 20) | 0.95 |
| High or very high | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
| Presence of a sibling aged 0–5 years | ||||
| Yes | 6 (−2, 14) | 0.15 | 16 (1, 31) | 0.03 |
| No | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
| Walking independently | ||||
| Yes | −6 (−15, 3.1) | 0.20 | 11 (−5, 28) | 0.18 |
| No | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
| Gross motor competency | ||||
| Higher | 13 (2, 23) | 0.02 | 25 (6, 45) | 0.01 |
| Lower | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
| PA-encouraging parenting practices score | ||||
| Higher | 11 (3, 19) | 0.01 | 18 (3, 32) | 0.02 |
| Lower | Reference | NA | Reference | NA |
CI, confidence interval; MVPA, moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity; NA, not applicable; PA, physical activity.
DISCUSSION
Main findings.
This cross-sectional study found that females on average engaged in 15 minutes/day less total PA than males in a US sample of children aged 10–16 months. MVPA also tended to be lower among females by 6 minutes/day; however, it did not reach a statistical significance. In this study sample, gross motor competency and PA parenting practices did not differ between males and females, which implies that gross motor competency and PA parenting practices do not explain the sex difference in PA. Regardless of sex, higher gross motor competency and higher PA-encouraging parenting practices were associated with higher PA.
Physical activity among toddlers.
In the CAMPAS sample with relatively high maternal education levels (88% college graduates), MVPA was estimated 75 minutes/day and total PA was 229 minutes/day. The sample overall had higher MVPA levels, but similar total PA levels, compared to 60 minutes/day of MVPA (95% CI = 49, 72) and 246 minutes/day of total PA (95% CI = 190, 302) estimated in a meta-analysis of 16 toddler PA studies.40 This is one of the few studies to evaluate sensor-measured PA level at the age when children begin to walk independently. The finding of significantly lower PA in children from neighborhoods with very low or low COIs suggests that children residing in neighborhoods with less positive neighborhood resources may have limited PA opportunities to develop healthy PA behaviors from a very young age. This finding is aligned with a review41 that emphasized the importance of environmental factors such as outdoor environment and play spaces for PA promotion among young children. As the toddler PA research field continues to expand, future research is guaranteed to identify specific neighborhood resources that can promote PA from a young age.
Sex differences in physical activity among toddlers.
Literature is well established to support that females are less active than males from preschool ages to adulthood. However, mixed findings have been reported in identifying the timing of when this sex difference emerges.42 Shull et al.11 reported no sex difference in PA in a US sample of 143 children aged 6–7 months. Hnatiuk et al.13 found no sex difference in MVPA and LPA in an Australian sample of 295 children at age 19 months. In contrast, Carson and Kuzik12 reported a 9 minutes/day lower MVPA among females in a Canadian sample of 149 children at age 19 months. In a US sample of 277 children aged 12–36 months, females were less active than males.14 The present study suggests that the sex difference in MVPA and total PA emerges at 10–16 months of age. Longitudinal studies are required to identify the exact timing of the sex difference in PA behavior development trajectory during early childhood. Future studies must also consider various important confounding factors, including individual, familiar, and neighborhood variables, to determine and explain sex differences in PA among young children.
Gross motor development and physical activity among toddlers.
A few prior studies21,43 reported that gross motor skill competency was higher among females than males at preschool age. However, in the current toddler sample, gross motor competency did not significantly differ by sex, and it little explained the sex difference in total PA found in the sample. Regardless, the finding of a positive association between gross motor development and PA levels is consistent with the findings of prior studies19–22 and supports that gross motor development and PA are strongly linked in reciprocal feedback loops.44 This result suggests that gross motor development should be closely monitored and appropriate actions should be taken in the general toddler population to support establishing healthy PA development from an early child age.
Physical activity parenting practices and physical activity among toddlers.
This study revealed no difference in PA parenting practices by child sex, consistent with prior study findings45 in UK children aged 2 years. This suggests that unlike for older children,15,24 a child’s sex may not play a role in determining parents’ PA practices for their children during toddlerhood. Instead, a sex difference in PA parenting practices may appear in later childhood.
PA parenting practices, such as role modeling and logistic support, have been shown to strongly influence a child’s PA behaviors.46 Consistent with the literature, this study found that PA-encouraging parenting practices, but not PA-discouraging parenting practices, were associated with toddlers’ MVPA levels. The most frequent PA-encouraging parenting practices included “go on a walk with the child”; “set aside time for active play”; “teach the child that being active is good for his/her health”; and “have outdoor toys available for the child”. These findings will inform PA promotion strategies for young children. For families with lower neighborhood and home resources (e.g., lack of park access or outdoor toys) and with less time for active play or walk, a childcare setting could provide great opportunities to offer PA-encouraging environments.47 Childcare PA policy has shown to have positive impacts on PA promotion among young children.48 Home- and childcare-based PA-encouraging practices are recommended to promote young children’s engagement in PA.
Strengths and Limitations.
The strengths of the current study include sensor-based PA assessment and no missing information. The limitations include that the cross-sectional study design prevents us from detecting causality. Specifically, this study was investigated assuming that gross motor competency leads to PA development;44 however, PA could also have improved gross motor competency in feedback loops.44 Due to relatively high maternal education levels (88% college graduates), the study findings may not be generalizable to other populations.
Conclusions
This cross-sectional study quantified 15 minutes/day lower total PA among females than males in a community-based convenience sample of US children aged 10–16 months. Gross motor development and PA-encouraging parenting practices were positively associated with PA among children aged 10–16 months. However, gross motor development or PA parenting practices did not explain the sex difference in PA. While these findings suggest that the sex difference in PA emerges during early toddlerhood, future longitudinal studies should be conducted to determine the exact timing of, as well as the factors that might drive, the sex difference in PA in young children.
Acknowledgement
REDCap is supported at FSM by the Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Science (NUCATS) Institute. Protocol development reported in this publication was supported, in part, by the National Institutes of Health’s National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Grant Number UL1TR001422. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Funding
This research was supported by US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL155113).
List Of Abbreviations
- CAMPAS
Child and Mother Physical Activity Study
- COI
child opportunity index
- LPA
light-intensity physical activity
- MVPA
moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity
- PA
physical activity
Funding Statement
This research was supported by US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL155113).
Footnotes
Ethics approval and consent to participate
All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.
Consent for publication
The Ann & Robert H Lurie Children’s Hospital Institutional Review Board approved the study protocol. Written informed consent was obtained from parents.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Contributor Information
Soyang Kwon, Ann and Robert H Lurie Children’s Hospital.
Sarah Welch, Northwestern University.
Selin Capan, Northwestern University.
Availability of data and materials
Data may be available upon request.
References
- 1.Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, Masse LC, Tilert T, McDowell M. Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(1):181–188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Telama R. Tracking of physical activity from childhood to adulthood: a review. Obesity facts. 2009;2(3):187–195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Hinkley T, Salmon J, Okely AD, Crawford D, Hesketh K. Preschoolers’ physical activity, screen time, and compliance with recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. Mar 2012;44(3):458–65. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318233763b [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Beets MW, Bornstein D, Dowda M, Pate RR. Compliance with national guidelines for physical activity in U.S. preschoolers: measurement and interpretation. Pediatrics. Apr 2011;127(4):658–64. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-2021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Pate RR, O’Neill JR, Brown WH, Pfeiffer KA, Dowda M, Addy CL. Prevalence of Compliance with a New Physical Activity Guideline for Preschool-Age Children. Childhood obesity (Print). Aug 2015;11(4):415–20. doi: 10.1089/chi.2014.0143 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Tucker P. The physical activity levels of preschool-aged children: A systematic review. Early childhood research quarterly. 2008;23(4):547–558. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.08.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, Bull FC. Worldwide trends in insufficient physical activity from 2001 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 358 population-based surveys with 1·9 million participants. Lancet Glob Health. Oct 2018;6(10):e1077–e1086. doi: 10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30357-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Bauman AE, Reis RS, Sallis JF, Wells JC, Loos RJ, Martin BW, Group LPASW. Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? Lancet. Jul 2012;380(9838):258–71. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60735-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ekelund U, Luan J, Sherar LB, Esliger DW, Griew P, Cooper A, Collaborators ICsADI. Moderate to vigorous physical activity and sedentary time and cardiometabolic risk factors in children and adolescents. JAMA. Feb 2012;307(7):704–12. doi:307/7/704 [pii] 10.1001/jama.2012.156 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Eichner-Seitz N, Pate RR, Paul IM. Physical activity in infancy and early childhood: a narrative review of interventions for prevention of obesity and associated health outcomes. Frontiers in endocrinology (Lausanne). 2023;14:1155925–1155925. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1155925 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Shull ER, Dowda M, McIver KL, McLain AC, Benjamin-Neelon SE, Ulrich B, Pate RR. Behavioral, Environmental, and Demographic Factors Associated with Objectively Measured Physical Activity in Infants. Childhood obesity (Print). Oct 2022;18(7):466–475. doi: 10.1089/chi.2021.0197 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Carson V, Kuzik N. Demographic correlates of screen time and objectively measured sedentary time and physical activity among toddlers: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 02 2017;17(1):187. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4125-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Hnatiuk J, Ridgers ND, Salmon J, Campbell K, McCallum Z, Hesketh K. Physical activity levels and patterns of 19-month-old children. Med Sci Sports Exerc. Sep 2012;44(9):1715–20. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31825825c4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Hager ER, Gormley CE, Latta LW, Treuth MS, Caulfield LE, Black MM. Toddler physical activity study: laboratory and community studies to evaluate accelerometer validity and correlates. BMC Public Health. Sep 2016;16:936. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3569-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Telford RM, Telford RD, Olive LS, Cochrane T, Davey R. Why Are Girls Less Physically Active than Boys? Findings from the LOOK Longitudinal Study. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0150041. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150041 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Cairney J, Kwan MY, Velduizen S, Hay J, Bray SR, Faught BE. Gender, perceived competence and the enjoyment of physical education in children: a longitudinal examination. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9(1):26–26. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-26 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Moore JB, Beets MW, Kaczynski AT, Besenyi GM, Morris SF, Kolbe MB. Sex Moderates Associations between Perceptions of the Physical and Social Environments and Physical Activity in Youth. Am J Health Promot. 2014;29(2):132–135. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.121023-ARB-516 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Veldman SLC, Jones RA, Santos R, Sousa-Sa E, Pereira JR, Zhang Z, Okely AD. Associations between gross motor skills and physical activity in Australian toddlers. J Sci Med Sport. Aug 2018;21(8):817–821. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.12.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Fisher A, Reilly JJ, Kelly LA, Montgomery C, Williamson A, Paton JY, Grant S. Fundamental movement skills and habitual physical activity in young children. Medicine and science in sports and exercise. 2005;37(4):684–688. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Foweather L, Knowles Z, Ridgers ND, O’Dwyer MV, Foulkes JD, Stratton G. Fundamental movement skills in relation to weekday and weekend physical activity in preschool children. J Sci Med Sport. Nov 2015;18(6):691–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.09.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Kwon S, O’Neill M. Socioeconomic and Familial Factors Associated with Gross Motor Skills among US Children Aged 3–5 Years: The 2012 NHANES National Youth Fitness Survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Jun 22 2020;17(12)doi: 10.3390/ijerph17124491 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Wijtzes AI, Kooijman MN, Kiefte-de Jong JC, et al. Correlates of physical activity in 2-year-old toddlers: the generation R study. J Pediatr. Sep 2013;163(3):791–9.e1–2. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.02.029 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Welk G, Wood L, Moss G. Parental influence on physical activity in children: am exploration of potential mechanisms. Ped Exerc Sci. 2009;15:19–33. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Trost SG, Sallis JF, Pate RR, Freedson PS, Taylor WC, Dowda M. Evaluating a model of parental influence on youth physical activity. Am J Prev Med. Nov 2003;25(4):277–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Welch SB, Honegger k, O’Brien M, Capan S, Kwon S. Examination of physical activity development in early childhood: protocol for a longitudinal cohort study of mother-toddler dyads. BMC Pediatr. 2023;23(1):129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.D’Cruz AFL, Downing KL, Sciberras E, Hesketh KD. Are physical activity and sleep associated with emotional self-regulation in toddlers? a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2024;24(1):61–61. doi: 10.1186/s12889-023-17588-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Kwon S, Honegger K, Mason M. Daily physical activity among toddlers: hip and wrist accelerometer assessments. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Dias KI, White J, Jago R, et al. International Comparison of the Levels and Potential Correlates of Objectively Measured Sedentary Time and Physical Activity among Three-to-Four-Year-Old Children. Int J Environ Res Public Health. May 31 2019;16(11)doi: 10.3390/ijerph16111929 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Kwon S, Tandon P, O’Neill M, Becker A. Cross-sectional association of light sensor-measured time outdoors with physical activity and gross motor competency among U.S. preschool-aged children: the 2012 NHANES National Youth Fitness Survey. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):833. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Vanderloo LM, Tucker P. An objective assessment of toddlers’ physical activity and sedentary levels: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:969. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2335-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Hnatiuk JA, Ridgers ND, Salmon J, Hesketh KD. Maternal correlates of young children’s physical activity across periods of the day. J Sci Med Sport. Feb 2017;20(2):178–183. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2016.06.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Hinkley T, O’Connell E, Okely AD, Crawford D, Hesketh K, Salmon J. Assessing volume of accelerometry data for reliability in preschool children. Med Sci Sports Exerc. Dec 2012;44(12):2436–41. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182661478 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Trost SG, Fees BS, Haar SJ, Murray AD, Crowe LK. Identification and validity of accelerometer cut-points for toddlers. Obesity (Silver Spring). Nov 2012;20(11):2317–9. doi: 10.1038/oby.2011.364 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Squires J, Bricker D. Ages & Stages Questionnaires®, Third Edition (ASQ®−3): A Parent-Completed Child Monitoring System. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., Inc.; 2009. [Google Scholar]
- 35.O’Connor TM, Cerin E, Hughes SO, et al. Psychometrics of the preschooler physical activity parenting practices instrument among a Latino sample. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2014;11:3. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-11-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Bettenhausen JL, Noelke C, Ressler RW, et al. The Association of the Childhood Opportunity Index on Pediatric Readmissions and Emergency Department Revisits. Acad Pediatr. 2022;22(4):614–621. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2021.12.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.diversitydatakids.org. Child Opportunity Index 3.0 database. Accessed May 21, 2024. https://www.diversitydatakids.org/child-opportunity-index
- 38.Pate RR, Frongillo EA, Cordan K, et al. Linking Activity, Nutrition, and Child Health (LAUNCH): protocol for a longitudinal cohort study of children as they develop from infancy to preschool age. BMC Public Health. Jun 15 2020;20(1):931. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09023-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.A health professional’s guide for using the new WHO growth charts. Paediatr Child Health. 2010;15(2):84–90. doi: 10.1093/pch/15.2.84 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Bruijns BA, Truelove S, Johnson AM, Gilliland J, Tucker P. Infants’ and toddlers’ physical activity and sedentary time as measured by accelerometry: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. Feb 7 2020;17(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-0912-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Arts J, tos E, Singh AS, Chinapaw MJM, Altenburg TM, Gubbels JS. Correlates of Physical Activity in 0- to 5-year-olds: A Systematic Umbrella Review and Consultation of International Researchers. Sports medicine (Auckland). 2023;53(1):215–240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Collings PJ, Dogra SA, Costa S, Bingham DD, Barber SE. Objectively-measured sedentary time and physical activity in a bi-ethnic sample of young children: variation by socio-demographic, temporal and perinatal factors. BMC Public Health. Jan 28 2020;20(1):109. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-8132-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Kokstejn J, Musalek M, Tufano JJ. Are sex differences in fundamental motor skills uniform throughout the entire preschool period? PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0176556. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176556 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Barnett LM, Morgan PJ, van Beurden E, Beard JR. Perceived sports competence mediates the relationship between childhood motor skill proficiency and adolescent physical activity and fitness: a longitudinal assessment. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008;5(1):40–40. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-40 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Kwon S, Kandula NR, Tandon PS, Shah NS. Physical activity and TV viewing parenting practices for toddlers among South Asians in the UK: Born in Bradford 1000 Study. BMC Public Health. 2023;23(1):1590. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Hutchens A, Lee RE. Parenting Practices and Children’s Physical Activity: An Integrative Review. The Journal of school nursing. 2018;34(1):68–85. doi: 10.1177/1059840517714852 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Kwon S, Mason M, Becker A. Environmental factors associated with child physical activity at childcare. Health Behavior and Policy Review. 2015;2(4):260–7. [Google Scholar]
- 48.Neshteruk C, Burkart S, Flanagan EW, Melnick E, Luecking C, Kracht CL. Policy, systems, and environmental interventions addressing physical activity in early childhood education settings: A systematic review. Prev Med. 2023;173:107606–107606. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2023.107606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data may be available upon request.
