shows that females were more depressed on average (p<0.001), reported greater parental supervision (p<0.01), and a greater proportion reported low physical activity than males (29.8% versus 22.9%, p<0.001).
Gender-specific health risk behavior clusters ranged from the most healthful (Cluster 1 – “Salutary Adherents”) to the least healthful cluster (Cluster 4 – “Risk Takers”), with “Salutary Adherents” reporting none of the health risk behaviors (). For both genders, Cluster 2 (“Active Snackers”) represented active, low fruit/vegetable consumers; Cluster 3 (“Sedentary Snackers”) represented physically inactive adolescents, many of whom were low fruit/vegetable consumers with some alcohol users and smokers; and Cluster 4 (“Risk Takers”) represented smokers and alcohol users with a large proportion of low fruit/vegetable consumers and some reporting low physical activity (). Except for the “Salutary Adherents” cluster (p=0.57), the other clusters differed according to gender (ps<0.01). Some male but no female “Active Snackers” used alcohol (14.5% vs. 0%, p<0.001); and a greater proportion of male “Risk Takers” were current smokers (60.1% vs. 26.9%, p<0.001) while a smaller percentage were physically inactive (16.7% vs. 33.3%, p=0.001) and had low fruit/vegetable consumption (48.3% vs. 78.8%, p=0.04).
Proportion reporting each health risk behavior within each cluster of health risk behaviors (2003, California).
Resiliency factors showed similar patterns of associations with individual health risk behaviors for both gender (). Parental supervision was associated with lower odds of smoking (males: OR=0.48, 95% CI=0.34, 0.67; female: OR=0.44, 95%CI=0.30, 0.64) and drinking (males: OR=0.54, 95% CI=0.43, 0.67; female: OR=0.36, 95%CI=0.28, 0.46), and role model presence was associated with lower odds of low physical activity (males: OR=0.63, 95% CI=0.46, 0.85; female: OR=0.69, 95%CI=0.51, 0.94) and fruit/vegetable consumption (males: OR=0.64, 95% CI=0.48, 0.86; female: OR=0.55, 95%CI=0.40, 0.75). Interestingly, parental support was positively associated with smoking (males: OR=1.52, 95% CI=1.06, 2.19; female: OR=1.45, 95%CI=1.04, 2.04), but was not associated with other factors. Depressiveness was positively associated with smoking (OR=1.99, 95% CI=1.39, 2.86) and drinking (OR=1.66, 95% CI=1.25, 2.18) in males, but was only associated with smoking in females (OR=2.04, 95% CI=1.44, 2.87).
The clusters differed based on socio-demographics (). Compared to White males, Latino, Asian and African American males were at greater odds of being “Sedentary Snackers” (ps≤0.05). African American females were at higher odds of being either “Active Snackers” (OR=2.94, 95%CI=1.35, 6.40) or “Sedentary Snackers” (OR=3.85, 95%CI=1.73, 8.58) than White females. Males from lower-income compared to higher income households were at lower odds of being “Active Snackers” (ps≤0.010), while females from single-parent households were at increased odds of being “Risk Takers” (OR=2.25, 95%CI=1.33, 3.80).
The results regarding resiliency factors showed that, in males, parental supervision was associated with lower odds of being in unhealthful clusters (ps≤0.05), but in females it was only associated with being a “Risk Taker” (OR=0.30, 95%CI=0.19, 0.44). For males, parental support was associated with lower odds of being an “Active Snacker” (OR=0.79, 95%CI=0.63, 1.00) or “Sedentary Snacker” (OR=0.74, 95%CI=0.57, 0.96). In females, role model presence was associated with lower odds of being in the 3 unhealthful clusters (ps≤0.05), but in males it was only associated with lower odds of being a “Sedentary Snacker” (OR=0.54, 95%CI=0.35, 0.82). Depressiveness was associated with increased odds of being in unhealthful clusters for females (ps≤0.05), but in males it only associated with being an “Active Snacker” (OR=0.69, 95%CI=0.50, 0.96).