Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Deborah J. Jones x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Cody D. Neshteruk, Deborah J. Jones, Asheley Skinner, Alice Ammerman, Deborah F. Tate and Dianne S. Ward

Background: Parents are influential in supporting children’s physical activity, but relatively little is known about the role of fathers in children’s physical activity. Methods: Semi-structured interviews (n = 24) were conducted with low-active and active fathers of children 3–11 years old. Deductive thematic analysis was used to identify fathers’ physical activity practices and understand how fathers interact with their children around physical activity. Results: All fathers demonstrated coparticipation in physical activity with their children. Other physical activity practices commonly used by fathers included as follows: facilitation of active opportunities, modeling, involvement through coaching or teaching, and encouragement. In addition, fathers viewed physical activity as an opportunity to spend time with their children to bond and develop shared interests. Finally, fathers perceived their role in children’s physical activity to be different compared with mothers. Regarding father activity level, active fathers discussed modeling more frequently and tended to engage in a variety of different activities compared with low-active fathers. Conclusions: Fathers play an important role in their children’s physical activity, suggesting that physical activity may be one context in which to prompt paternal involvement, foster father–child relationships, and strengthen paternal parenting.

Restricted access

Deborah R. Smith, Ben Jones, Louise Sutton, Roderick F.G.J. King and Lauren C. Duckworth

Good nutrition is essential for the physical development of adolescent athletes, however data on dietary intakes of adolescent rugby players are lacking. This study quantified and evaluated dietary intake in 87 elite male English academy rugby league (RL) and rugby union (RU) players by age (under 16 (U16) and under 19 (U19) years old) and code (RL and RU). Relationships of intakes with body mass and composition (sum of 8 skinfolds) were also investigated. Using 4-day diet and physical activity diaries, dietary intake was compared with adolescent sports nutrition recommendations and the UK national food guide. Dietary intake did not differ by code, whereas U19s consumed greater energy (3366 ± 658 vs. 2995 ± 774 kcal·day-1), protein (207 ± 49 vs. 150 ± 53 g·day-1) and fluid (4221 ± 1323 vs. 3137 ± 1015 ml·day-1) than U16s. U19s consumed a better quality diet than U16s (greater intakes of fruit and vegetables; 4.4 ± 1.9 vs. 2.8 ± 1.5 servings·day-1; nondairy proteins; 3.9 ± 1.1 vs. 2.9 ± 1.1 servings·day-1) and less fats and sugars (2.0 ± 1. vs. 3.6 ± 2.1 servings·day-1). Protein intake vs. body mass was moderate (r = .46, p < .001), and other relationships were weak. The findings of this study suggest adolescent rugby players consume adequate dietary intakes in relation to current guidelines for energy, macronutrient and fluid intake. Players should improve the quality of their diet by replacing intakes from the fats and sugars food group with healthier choices, while maintaining current energy, and macronutrient intakes.