Effectiveness of mother and daughter interventions targeting physical activity, fitness, nutrition and adiposity: A systematic review.

Alyce T Barnes, Myles D Young, Elaine M Murtagh, Clare E Collins, Ronald C Plotnikoff, Philip J Morgan

Journal: Preventive medicine 2019;111():55-66

PMID: 29291423

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Physical inactivity and poor dietary habits in women pose a clear public health burden. Mothers are generally the main female role model for daughters, therefore, targeting intergenerational females simultaneously may be a novel approach. However, the effectiveness of this approach to improve physical activity, fitness, nutrition and adiposity has not been systematically examined.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of physical activity, fitness and nutrition interventions targeting mothers and their daughters.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Psychinfo, EMBASE, Ovid Medline, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Sportdiscus and Informit were searched for English language studies (1980-2015).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTS), non-randomized experimental trials and pre-post studies of physical activity, fitness, nutrition and adiposity interventions targeting mothers and daughters were eligible if they reported changes in physical activity, fitness, dietary intake or adiposity.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted using a standardized template and checked by a second author.

DATA SYNTHESIS

3577 articles were screened and 14 unique studies (7 RCTs, 1 pseudo-randomized, 1 non-randomized, 5 pre-post) met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were conducted in the US (n=11) and most were limited by methodological concerns. Of the RCTs that targeted each outcome exclusively, ≤20%, ≤20% ≤21% and 0% were successful for improving physical activity, fitness, nutrition and adiposity respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, evidence for the effectiveness of mother-daughter interventions to improve physical activity, fitness, nutrition and adiposity is inconclusive. The diversity of study designs, exposures and outcomes used, along with methodological weaknesses means that well-designed and reported RCTs are warranted.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Address: Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Education, Faculty of Education and Arts, University of Newcastle, Callaghan Campus, 2308, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].; Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Education, Faculty of Education and Arts, University of Newcastle, Callaghan Campus, 2308, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].; Department of Arts Education and Physical Education, Mary Immaculate College, University of Limerick, Ireland. Electronic address: [email protected].; Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan Campus, 2308, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].; Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Education, Faculty of Education and Arts, University of Newcastle, Callaghan Campus, 2308, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].; Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Education, Faculty of Education and Arts, University of Newcastle, Callaghan Campus, 2308, Australia. Electronic address: [email protected].
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.