Table 2.

Results of studies examining associations between intergenerational social mobility and leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) in adulthood: arranged by country

Study name, country	How results were presented*	Results: prevalence/model estimates*	Adjustment for covariates
MRC National Survey of Health and Development, UK23	Prevalence (%) of LTPA (sports and leisure latent class) by occupational and educational mobility.	Occupation: ♂: M/M=24.9, M/NM=35.2, NM/M=27.7, NM/NM=41.5. ♀: M/M=26.5, M/NM=37.9, NM/M=40.0, NM/NM=48.4. Education: ♂: low/low =26.6, low/high =35.1, high/low =34.1, high/high =41.8. ♀: low/low =30.3, low/high =46.2, high/low =37.2, high/high =58.3 (p<0.001 (likelihood ratio test) for both occupation and education and both men and women).	None
British Regional Heart Study, UK24 25	Prevalence (%) of LTPA by occupational mobility.	Physically active: M/M=34, M/NM=46, NM/M=35, NM/NM=51 (p<0.05) (Wannamethee et al 1996). Physically inactive: M/M=34, M/NM=29, NM/M=32, NM/NM=29 (Ramsay et al 2009).	None
British Women's Heart and Health Study, UK26 27	ORs of low LTPA by occupational mobility.	ORs of <2 hours/week.: M/NM vs M/M=0.79 (0.66 to 0.94). NM/M vs NM/NM=1.47 (1.05 to 2.06). M/M vs NM/NM=1.55 (1.24 to 1.94) (Watt et al 2009). ORs of <1 hour/week: NM/NM=1.00; NM/M=1.67 (1.09 to 2.55), M/NM=1.55 (1.14 to 2.10), M/M=1.90 (1.14 to 2.54) (Lawlor et al 2004).	None
2003 Scottish Health Survey, UK28	Prevalence (%) and prevalence difference in sports by occupational mobility.	IV and V/IV and V=25.8 (19.0 to 32.6); IV and V/I and II=49.3 (41.1 to 57.6); I and II/IV and V=43.5 (33.2 to 53.8); I and II/I and II=62.8 (58.5 to 67.0). Prevalence difference when compared with those stable in SEP of origin for (1) upwardly mobile: adjusted for parental occupation =9.6 (4.0 to 15.3); adjusted for adult occupation =−6.2 (−11.2 to −1.2) and (2) downwardly mobile: adjusted for parental occupation =−11.0 (−16.5 to −5.5); adjusted for adult occupation =6.2 (0.4 to 12.0).	Age, sex (plus parents’/own adult SEP in model)
Mid span family Study, UK29	Prevalence (%) of low physical activity (at work, LTPA and daily activity) by educational mobility.	♂: M/M=16.9 (12.9 to 21.0), M/NM=27.6 (23.0 to 32.2), NM/M=12.9 (5.6 to 20.3), NM/NM=30.8 (25.1 to 36.5). ♀: M/M=20.7 (15.5 to 25.9), M/NM=32.1 (28.4 to 35.8), NM/M=16.3 (6.2 to 26.4), NM/NM=27.0 (22.4 to 31.6).	Age
West of Scotland Collaborative Study, UK30 31	Mean exercise hours/week by occupational mobility.	M/M=5.7; 5.9, M/NM=6.3; 6.1, NM/M=6.2; 6.7, NM/NM=6.5; 6.4 (two estimates per group from two measures of adult occupational class: at study screening and at labour market entry) (Hart et al 1998). IV and V/IV and V=5.5, IV and V/I and II=5.5, I and II/IV and V=5.2 I and II/I and II=6.5 (Blane et al 1996).	Age
Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study, Finland32	Mean (SE) low exercise score by educational mobility.	♂: low/low =112.64 (2.72), low/high =115.87 (0.96), high/low =122.59 (5.90), high/high =113.56 (1.53). ♀: low/low =118.45 (1.87), low/high =116.76 (0.8), high/low =120.98 (4.23), high/high =114.89 (1.3) (p=0.3 for ♂ and ♀).	Age
Adolescent Health and Lifestyle Surveys, Finland33	Relative risk of no LTPA for socially mobile compared with those stable in SEP of origin.	Downwardly mobile from upper white-collar workers =3.6 (2.0 to 6.4), downwardly mobile from lower white-collar workers =3.7 (2.5 to 5.4), upwardly mobile from blue-collar workers and farmers =0.3 (0.2 to 0.4), upwardly mobile from lower white-collar workers =0.8 (0.5 to 1.3).	Age, sex
The Study of Men Born in 1913, Sweden34	Prevalence of low exercise in three occupational mobility groups (text only).	‘The percentage of men who had low exercise levels at the age of 60 was significantly higher among those who had socially moved downwards’ (p (correlation) =0.002) (results for other trajectories not reported).	None
The Johns Hopkins Precursors Study, USA35	Prevalence (%) of physical training in male physicians by father's occupational class.	High/high (father with high SEP): none =49.6, little =31.8, moderate/much =18.6. Low/high (father with low SEP): none =50.6, little =31.2, moderate/much =18.2.	None
Women Physician Health Study, USA36	Prevalence (%) of regular exercise in female physicians by education of parents.	Mother: < high school =49, high school =50, some college =48, college graduate =48, graduate school =52, medical school =45. Father: < high school =48, high school =48, some college =52, college graduate =49, graduate school =50, medical school =50. Both parents: ≤ high school =48, mix =49, ≥ high school =53.	None
Childhood Determinants of Adult Health Study, Australia37 38	Prevalence (%) and change in LTPA by educational mobility.	LTPA at 26–36 years (%): ♂: low/low =31, low/high =36, high/low =47, high/high =50. ♀: low/low =18, low/high =32, high/low =24, high/high =33 (p<0.01 for ♂ and ♀) (Gall et al 2010). Relative risk of increasing LTPA from 9–15 to 26–36 years (versus always inactive): ♂: low/low =1.00, low/high =1.49 (1.06 to 2.09), high/low =1.13 (0.76 to 1.69), high/high =1.58 (1.08 to 2.29). ♀: low/low =1.00, low/high =1.38 (1.04 to 1.83), high/low =1.10 (0.79 to 1.54), high/high =1.17 (0.84 to 1.62) (Cleland et al 2009).	None (%) Age (model)
Pelotas Birth Cohort 1982, Brazil39	Prevalence ratio of low LTPA by income mobility.	♂: non-poor/non-poor =1.00, non-poor/poor =1.32 (1.19 to 1.47), poor/non-poor =1.07 (0.94 to 1.22), poor/poor =1.19 (1.05 to 1.35). ♀: non-poor/non-poor =1.00, non-poor/poor =1.14 (1.08 to 1.20), poor/non-poor =1.06 (0.99 to 1.13), poor/poor =1.18 (1.12 to 1.24), (p<0.001 for ♂ and ♀).	Skin colour

Social mobility is based on change in SEP between parents and adult offspring, that is, intergenerational social mobility.

*For brevity, studies presenting multiple results were not exhaustively extracted to the table. 95% CIs presented unless specified otherwise.

M, manual; NM, non-manual; SEP, socioeconomic position.