Eating Attitudes, Dieting, and Body Composition in Female Students

This report presents an analysis of demographic data, anthropometric measurements, eating attitudes, and body composition among 60 female students from Doctor of Chiropractic (DC), nutrition, and non-health-related programs. The study examines the prevalence of eating disorders using the E...Read More

Results
The mean of demographic data and anthropometric measurements of participants among
60 female students in the three deferent programs DC, nutrition and non- health related programs
is given in Table 1. The students had normal mean of BMI, no risk of WC, low risk of WHR,
and average fat mass percentages according to WHO criteria which outlines that a person’s
normal BMI should be between 18.5-24.9 kg/m2. Nutrition students had the lowest mean of body
weight (129.54±22.54), and BMI (23.17 ± 3.29) compared to the other programs. Table 2 Shows
the comparison of EAT-26, TDS and body composition measurements between the three
programs.
Figure 1 shows the age distribution among the participants from Doctor of Chiropractic
(DC), nutrition, and non-health related major students. There are 37 participants who are 25
years and below with 15 being between the age of 26 and 30 while there are 5 participants who
are between the age of 31-35, with only 1 participant being of the age group 36-40 while 2 are
above the age of 40 making a tally of 60 participants.
Table 1: Demographic distribution statistics and Anthropometric Measurements of Students in Three Programs

Where: DC: Doctor of Chiropractic, BMI: Body Mass Index, WC: Waist Circumference, WHR: Waist-Hip
Ratio.
Figure 1: Age distribution of participants
Table 2: Comparison of EAT-26, TDS and body composition between Programs

Figure 2: Comparison of eating habits
Nutrition students have the least EAT-26 score of 6.85 while those taking Doctor of
Chiropractic have an EAT-26 score of 7.25 and students with the highest EAT-26 score are those
taking Non-Health related majors at 7.55 EAT-26 score. (figure 2)
Figure 3: Mean Tendency to Diet Scale (TDS)
The mean of Tendency to Diet Scale (TDS) scores between the three majors from figure
3 indicates that the DC students having the highest TDS of 32.5 while Nutrition and Non-health
related major’s students have subsequently lower TDS scores of 31.5 and 30.3 respectively.

Table 3: Prevalence of eating disorder (EDs)
Although there were no significant differences between students of the three groups of
degrees and the EAT total score (p = 0.349), table 3 illustrates that there were 5% of students
being identified as having EDs from all of the three programs as well as 5% DC students were
identified as having EDs, while 10% in nutrition students indicated with EDs, however there
were no from non-health related majors who were identified with EDs.
Table 4:Comparison of EAT-26 and TDS between students in different years

Further analysis of the eating behavior among students in different study groups indicates
that graduate nutrition and the first and second year DC students are at risk of EDs. Moreover,
mean of EAT-26 score in the first and second year DC students (9.08) was significantly higher
than third and fourth-year students (P=0.038) see table 4.
Figure 4:EAT-26 scores of students per year
Doctor of Chiropractic students in year 1 and 2 have a higher EAT-26 score compared to
those in year 3 and 4 i.e. 4.5<9.08 as depicted in figure 4
Year 1&2
Year 3&4
31.4 31.6 31.8 32 32.2 32.4 32.6 32.8 33 33.2
32
33
TDS Scores
Figure 5: TDS score per year of DC students
Year 3 and 4 students have a higher TDS score (33) compared to year 1 and 2 students
(32) (figure 5)

Undergraduate
Graduate
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
1.89
10.91
EAT-26 Scores
Figure 6: EAT-26 scores of nutrition students
From figure 6 it is evident that graduate students have the highest EAT-26 score of 10.91
while undergraduate students have the least EAT-26 score of 1.89.
Undergraduate
Graduate
28.5 29 29.5 30 30.5 31 31.5 32 32.5 33
30
32.73
TDS Scores
Figure 7: TDS scores of nutrition students
In the comparison the mean of Tendency to Diet Scale (TDS) scores between the
nutrition students in different levels figure 7 indicates that, undergraduate students have the least
TDS (30) while graduate students have the highest (32.73).

Year 1&2
Year 3&4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7.19
9
EAT-26 Scores
Figure 8: EAT-26 scores of Non-health related major students
Figure 8 shows Comparison the mean of Eating Attitude Test-26 (EAT-26) scores
between the non-health related majors students in different years.
Year 1&2
Year 3&4
26.5 27 27.5 28 28.5 29 29.5 30 30.5 31 31.5
30.88
28
TDS Scores
Figure 9: TDS scores of Non-health related major students
Figure 9 depicts the comparison the mean of Tendency to Diet Scale (TDS) scores
between the non-health related majors students in different years

Table 5: Classification and comparison of BMI.
Nutrition students had 75% of normal BMI and no obesity was identified compared to
65% of normal BMI and 15% obesity in DC students and non-health related programs. However,
there was no statically significant found between the groups (P= 0.501) indicating there is no
statistical evidence of a relationship between BMI and major taken by student at 95% confidence
interval.
Figure 10: Total of BMI Classification of Students in the Three Majors

Table 6: Waist circumference classification and comparison.
The majority of students (63.3%) were not at the risk of central obesity that associated
with chronic diseases. Among the groups, 65% of nutrition and non-health related programs, and
60% of DC students were not at the risk of central obesity. However, the results showed no
statically significant between the groups (P=0.931) see table 6. Hence, p-value of 0.931 at 0.05
level of significance indicates that there is no relationship between the WC of student and major
taken by the student.
No Risk Risk
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
63.30%
36.70%
Chart Title
Figure 11: Total of WC Classification of Students in the Three Majors

Table 7:Waist Hip Ratio classification and comparisons
The majority of students (65%) in the groups were in the low category of WHR. Non-
health related program students were the majority that had the lowest category (70%) with
nutrition students having 65% and DC students 60% (table 7). 15% of the nutrition students had
high WHR compared to 10% of students from the DC and non-health related majors.
Low Moderate High
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
65.00%
23.30%
11.70%
Chart Title
Figure 12: Total of WHR Classification of Students in the Three Majors

Table 8: Classification and comparison of Fat Mass percentages
From table 8, it is evident there are no significant differences were found in fat mass
percentage among the three groups, p = 0.890. The p-value of 0.89 at 0.05 level of significance
indicates that there is no relationship between the kind of major taken by the student and fat
percentage.
≤24% 25-31% ≥32%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
51.70%
30.00%
18.30%
Chart Title
Figure 13: Total of Fat% Classification of Students in the Three Majors

DC Nutrition Non-health related majors
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
15% 15%
25%
Fat%
Figure 14: Obesity Students in the Three Programs
Table 9: Relation between body composition and EAT-26.
Table 9 outlines the results of the t-test between various variables of interest. The main
purpose is to examine the existence of a difference between the means of the variables. At a
confidence interval of 95%, there is no difference in the means between BMI, WC, WHR and
body Fat% of the students given that the p-value of the t-test for all the variables are 0.502,
0.571, 0.313, and 0.645 respectively which are less than 0.05 and hence conclude that there is no
significant difference between the means.

Table 10: Relation between body composition and TDS
Table 10 shows the relation between body composition and TDS between the groups. The
results found no significance association between the response of TDS scores and the body
composition measurements, BMI (p=0.451), WC (p=0.380), WHR (p=0.694) and fat %
(p=0.560).
Table 11: Correlation between body composition measurements, EAT-26, and TDS scores
Examination of whether there exists a correlation between the parameters being measured
which is depicted in table 11, it was found out that is no significant correlation between EAT-26
and body composition measurements in BMI with a correlation coefficient of 0.13; p-value of

0.924 at 95% confidence interval. Moreover, other variables which do not have any significant
correlations at 0.05 level of significance are WC and WHR with p-values greater than 0.05.
However, there was a significant correlation between TDS and BMI with a low correlation
coefficient of 0.287 and a p-value for 0.026<0.05. In addition, TDS and WC indicates a
significant correlation with a p-value of 0.027<0.05 hence it can be concluded that there is a
relationship between the variables of TDS and WHR as well as TDS and WC.
Table 12: comparison of body composition between DC students in different years.
In comparison of body composition between DC students in different years, table 12
indicates that First and second-year group and third and fourth years’ group of DC students had a
significant association in BMI (p=0.049), and in WC (p=0.05). The BMI of third and fourth year

DC students were normal (=22.3) and lower in WC (=30.6) compared to first and second year of
DC students were overweight (=26.4) and higher in WC (=33.6).
Table 13: comparison of body composition between undergraduate and graduate nutrition students.
In comparison of body composition between graduate and undergraduate nutrition
students shows that graduate students had a lower mean of BMI (22), WC (29), and fat% (24)
than undergraduate students see table 13

Table 14: Comparison of body composition between non-health related majors student in different years.
Among non-health related major’s student in different years, significant association
between BMI, and the first and second year and third and fourth-year students from non-health
related major (p=0.033) indicating that BMI among non-health students in year 1 is related to
their year of study as given in table 14.
In general, the prevailing themes concerning the choice of dietetics careers is that, there is
a significant relationship between nutrition knowledge and the effect of the knowledge on the
eating behavior of the students given that there is significant difference between eating patterns
of students who have just taken up the course and those who have pursued it for a while i.e. 1st
and 2nd years have different scores compared to 3rd and 4th years respectively. Such differences
can be inferred back to increasing nutrition knowledge.