Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Results of a Nutrition and Physical Activity Peer Counseling Intervention among Nontraditional College Students

  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Health promotion efforts targeting nontraditional college students (older, part-time enrollment, and working) may be an optimal way to reach large populations that potentially face health disparities. A randomized trial was undertaken to examine the feasibility of a nutrition and physical activity behavioral intervention among nontraditional undergraduate college students at a large urban public university. Over 8 weeks, participants received either (1) a brief tailored feedback report plus three motivational interviewing-based calls from trained peer counselors (intervention; n = 40) or (2) the report only (control; n = 20). Participants mean age was 32 years (SD = 10), 58 % were female, 47 % were racial/ethnic minorities, and 25 % reported receiving public health insurance. Most (78 %) intervention group participants completed at least two of three peer counseling calls. At follow-up, those in the intervention vs. control group self-reported beneficial, but non-statistically significant changes in fruits and vegetables (+0.7 servings/day), sugary drinks (−6.2 oz/day), and fast food visits (−0.2 visits/week). For physical activity, there was a non-statistically significant decrease in moderate-vigorous physical activity (107.2 min/week) in the intervention vs. control group. Overall satisfaction with the program was high, although there were recommendations made for improving the structure and number of calls. Findings indicate that the intervention was feasible with promising effects on nutrition behaviors and the need to better target physical activity behaviors. Future work entails implementation in a larger sample with objectively measured behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ogden CL, Lamb MM, Carroll MD, Flegal KM (2010) NCHS Data Brief, No. 50: obesity and socioeconomic status in adults: United States, 2005–2008

  2. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Ogden CL (2012) Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among US adults, 1999–2010. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 307:491–497. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fine LJ, Philogene GS, Gramling R et al (2004) Prevalence of multiple chronic disease risk factors: 2001 national health interview survey. Am J Prev Med 27:18–24. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2004.04.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kushi LH, Byers T, Doyle C et al (2006) American cancer society guidelines on nutrition and physical activity for cancer prevention: reducing the risk of cancer with healthy food choices and physical activity. CA Cancer J Clin 56:254–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Laska MN, Pelletier JE, Larson NI, Story M (2012) Interventions for weight gain prevention during the transition to young adulthood: a review of the literature. J Adolesc Health 50:324–333. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.01.016

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Choy S (2002) Nontraditional undergraduates: findings from the condition of education no. NCES 2002–012. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 2002; http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002012.pdf

  7. Snyder T, Dillow S (2012) Digest of education statistics, 2011 chapter 3, no. NCES 2012–2001. Washington DC: U.S. Department of education, institute of education sciences, national center for education statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012001.pdf Accessed 23 January 2015

  8. U.S. Department of Education Profile of Undergraduate Students 2007–08 no. NCES 2010–205 (2010) Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010205.pdf Accessed 23 January 2015

  9. Kulavic K, Hultquist CN, McLester JR (2013) A comparison of motivational factors and barriers to physical activity among traditional versus nontraditional college students. J Am Coll Health 61:60–66. doi:10.1080/07448481.2012.753890

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sorensen G, Emmons K, Hunt MK et al (2003) Model for incorporating social context in health behavior interventions: Applications for cancer prevention for working-class, multiethnic populations. Prev Med 37:188–197. doi:10.1016/S0091-7435(03)00111-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McNeill LH, Stoddard A, Bennett GG et al (2012) Influence of individual and social contextual factors on changes in leisure-time physical activity in working-class populations: results of the healthy directions-small businesses study. Cancer Causes Control 23:1475–1487. doi:10.1007/s10552-012-0021-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Shelton RC, Goldman RE, Emmons KM et al (2011) An investigation into the social context of low-income, urban Black and Latina women: Implications for adherence to recommended health behaviors. Health Educ Behav 38:471–481. doi:10.1177/1090198110382502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sorensen G, Stoddard AM, Dubowitz T et al (2007) The influence of social context on changes in fruit and vegetable consumption: Results of the healthy directions studies. Am J Public Health 97:1216–1227. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2006.088120

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Office of Institutional Research and Policy Studies (2010) Headcount and FTE enrollment. Boston MA: University of Massachusetts Boston. http://cdn.umb.edu/images/oirp/2013_TABLE1-Student_Headcount__FTE_by_Full-timePart-time_Status.pdf Accessed 23 January 2015

  15. Office of Institutional Research and Policy Studies (2008) Who are our undergraduates? Boston MA: office of institutional research and policy studies, University of Massachusetts Boston. http://www.umb.edu/editor_uploads/images/oirp/WhoareourUndergraduates_Feb-08.ppt Accessed 23 January 2015

  16. U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2010) Dietary guidelines for Americans, 2010. GPO, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  17. Moyers T, Martin T, Manuel J, Miller (2005) The motivational interviewing treatment integrity (MITI) Code: Version 2.0

  18. Rollnick S, Miller W, Butler C (2008) Motivational interviewing in health care: helping patients change behavior. The Guilford Press

  19. Quintiliani L, Bishop H, Greaney M, Whiteley J (2012) Factors across home, work, and school domains influence nutrition and physical activity behaviors of nontraditional college students. Nutr Res 32:757–763

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Health and Retirement Study (2008) Survey research center, institute for social research, university of Michigan national institute on aging, health and retirement study. http://hrsonline.isr.umich.edu Accessed 23 January 2015

  21. Block G, Gillespie C, Rosenbaum EH, Jenson C (2000) A rapid food screener to assess fat and fruit and vegetable intake. Am J Prev Med 18:284–288

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hedrick VE, Comber DL, Estabrooks PA et al (2010) The beverage intake questionnaire: Determining initial validity and reliability. J Am Diet Assoc 110:1227–1232. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2010.05.005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. California Health Interview Survey (2009) UCLA center for health policy research; California department of public health; California department of health care services. http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/chis/design/Pages/questionnairesEnglish.aspx Accessed 23 January 2015

  24. Yore M, Ham S, Ainsworth B et al (2007) Reliability and validity of the instrument used in BRFSS to assess physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39:1267–1274. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e3180618bbe

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sallis JF, Pinski RB, Grossman RM et al (1988) The development of self-efficacy scales for health related diet and exercise behaviors. Health Educ Res 3:283–292. doi:10.1093/her/3.3.283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Prochaska J, Redding C, Evers K (2008) The transtheoretical model and stages of change. Health behavior health education: theory research practice, 4th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass, pp 97–121

  27. Klein HJ, Wesson MJ, Hollenbeck JR et al (2001) The assessment of goal commitment: a measurement model meta-analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 85:32–55. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Quintiliani L, Carbone E (2005) Impact of diet-related cancer prevention messages written with cognitive and affective arguments on message characteristics, stage of change, and self-efficacy. J Nutr Educ Behav 37:12–19. doi:10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60254-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Campbell MK, Honess-Morreale L, Farrell D et al (1999) A tailored multimedia nutrition education pilot program for low-income women receiving food assistance. Health Educ Res 14:257–267. doi:10.1093/her/14.2.257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Poobalan AS, Aucott LS, Precious E et al (2010) Weight loss interventions in young people (18 to 25 year olds): a systematic review. Obes Rev 11:580–592. doi:10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00673.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Greene GW, White AA, Hoerr SL et al (2012) Impact of an online healthful eating and physical activity program for college students. Am J Health Promot 27:E47–E58. doi:10.4278/ajhp.110606-QUAN-239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pokhrel P, Little MA, Herzog TA (2014) Current methods in health behavior research among U.S. community college students a review of the literature. Eval Health Prof 37:178–202. doi:10.1177/0163278713512125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lesley ML (2007) Social problem solving training for African Americans: effects on dietary problem solving skill and DASH diet-related behavior change. Patient Educ Couns 65:137–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by funding from the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health (grant number 5R03CA139943), and from the National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health (grant number T15LM007092) from a post-doctoral fellowship to L.Q. The National Cancer Institute and the National Library of Medicine had no role in the design, analysis, or writing of this article. The authors acknowledge scientific mentoring provided by Robert H. Friedman, MD and Glorian Sorensen, PhD and technical assistance in data analysis provided by Heather Kelley, MA and in implementing the study protocol provided by Hillary Bishop, MPH and Nathan Brooks, MD, MPH. Finally, the authors thank the many students and staff members who supported this research project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Section of General Internal Medicine, Boston University, 801 Massachusetts Ave., Crosstown Center, 2nd Floor, Boston, MA, 02118, USA

    Lisa M. Quintiliani

  2. Department of Exercise and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Boston, 100 Morrissey Blvd., Science Center, 3rd floor, Boston, MA, 02125, USA

    Jessica A. Whiteley

Authors
  1. Lisa M. Quintiliani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jessica A. Whiteley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa M. Quintiliani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Quintiliani, L.M., Whiteley, J.A. Results of a Nutrition and Physical Activity Peer Counseling Intervention among Nontraditional College Students. J Canc Educ 31, 366–374 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-015-0858-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-015-0858-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation