Background Low socioeconomic position is generally associated with increased risk of preterm birth, but it remains unclear whether the inequality depends on the socioeconomic measure used, if the associations differ according to the degree of prematurity, and how individual level risk factors mediate the association. Methods The hazard ratios (HR) of preterm birth associated with five different measures of socioeconomic position and three degrees of preterm birth were analysed in a dataset of 75 890 singleton pregnancies (1996–2002) from the Danish National Birth Cohort. This, and the mediating role of selected individual level risk factors (smoking, alcohol consumption, binge drinking, pre-pregnancy body mass index, gestational weight gain) were estimated, using Cox regression analyses. Results Mothers with 12 years of education and the association interacted with parity, while income and occupation affected the risk to a lesser degree. The adjusted HR for less educated nulliparous and parous women were 1.22 (95% CI 1.04–1.42) and 1.56 (95% CI 1.31–1.87), respectively, compared with women with >12 years of education. For parous women with <10 years of education inclusion of smoking in the model decreased the HR of preterm birth to 1.43 (95% CI 1.19–1.72). Conclusions Maternal educational level was the strongest predictor of preterm birth among five socioeconomic measures and the gradient did not differ significantly according to the degree of preterm birth. For parous women smoking explained some of the educational gradient but in general the selected risk factors only reduced the relative educational gradient in preterm birth marginally.

Evidence suggests that sitting time is adversely associated with health risks. However, previous epidemiological studies have mainly addressed mortality whereas little is known of the risk of coronary heart disease. This study aimed to investigate total sitting time and risk of myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease incidence and all-cause mortality. In the Danish Health Examination Survey (DANHES) conducted in 2007-2008 we tested the hypothesis that a higher amount of daily total sitting time is associated with greater risk of myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality. The study population consisted of 71,363 men and women aged 18-99 years without coronary heart disease. Participants were followed for myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease and mortality in national registers to August 10, 2012. Cox regression analyses were performed with adjustment for potential confounders and multiple imputation for missing values. During a mean follow-up period of 5.4 years 358 incident cases of myocardial infarction, 1,446 of coronary heart disease, and 1,074 deaths from all causes were registered. The hazard ratios associated with 10 or more hours of daily sitting compared to less than 6 hours were 1.38 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.88) for myocardial infarction, 1.07 (95% CI: 0.91, 1.27) for coronary heart disease and 1.31 (95% CI: 1.09, 1.57). Compared to sitting less than 6 hours per day and being physically active in leisure time, the hazard ratios of sitting more than 10 hours per day and also being physically inactive in leisure time were 1.80 (95% CI: 1.15, 2.82) for myocardial infarction, 1.42 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.81) for coronary heart disease, and 2.29 (95% CI: 1.82, 2.89) for all-cause mortality. The results suggest that a higher amount of daily total sitting time is associated with all-cause mortality, particularly among inactive adults. In relation to coronary heart, disease results were less clear. This paper adds new evidence to the limited data on the evidence of sitting time and cardiovascular disease and mortality.

Using self-reported surveys to monitor physical activity levels in the population require short items covering both time and intensity. The present study aims to 1) develop the Nordic Physical Activity Questionnaire-short from the original version of the NPAQ, 2) assess test-retest reliability and criterion validity of the NPAQ-short, and 3) test the NPAQ-short’s ability to monitor compliance with the WHO recommendations on physical activity. In addition, we aimed to compare open and closed-ended answering modes for the NPAQ-short. A sample of 122 participants were included. The NPAQ-short comprised of two questions on weekly moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and vigorous physical activity (VPA). It was filled in twice, two weeks apart, in open- and closed-ended versions. Physical activity was measured objectively by an Actiheart accelerometer worn 24 h/day seven consecutive days. Spearman’s rank correlation and Cohen’s kappa were used to assess correlations between the test and retest results, and between the objective and the self-reported measures. Valid data was available for 92 participants. Test-retest reliability showed Spearman’s rho = 0.82 for MVPA and 0.80 for VPA. For the open-ended questions, the correlations between self-reported and objectively measured physical activity levels were Spearman’s rho = 0.33 for MVPA and rho = 0.32 for VPA. For closed-ended questions, the kappa-coefficients were 0.17 for MVPA and 0.21 for VPA. When using objective and self-reported measures to monitor WHO’s physical activity recommendations, the kappa correlations were 0.42 for open-ended and 0.34 for closed-ended answering modes. The NPAQ-short was found to be sufficiently reliable and valid to monitor physical activity levels in the population when using both open and closed-ended questions. However, using open-ended questions seems to be a better answering mode for self-reported surveys monitoring WHO’s physical activity recommendations.

Objective: Health effects of different physical activity domains (ie, during leisure time, work and transport) are generally considered positive. UsingActive Worker consortiumdata, we assessed independent associations of occupational and leisure-time physical activity (OPA and LTPA) with all-cause mortality.Design: Two-stage individual participant data meta-analysis.Data source: Published and unpublished cohort study data.Eligibility criteria: Working participants aged 18–65 years.Methods: After data harmonisation, we assessed associations of OPA and LTPA with all-cause mortality. In stage 1, we analysed data from each study separately using Cox survival regression, and in stage 2, we pooled individual study findings with random-effects modelling.Results: In 22 studies with up to 590 497 participants from 11 countries, during a mean follow-up of 23.1 (SD: 6.8) years, 99 743 (16%) participants died. Adjusted for LTPA, body mass index, age, smoking and education level, summary (ie, stage 2) hazard ration (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for low, moderate and high OPA among men (n=2 96 134) were 1.01 (0.99 to 1.03), 1.05 (1.01 to 1.10) and 1.12 (1.03 to 1.23), respectively. For women (n=2 94 364), HRs (95% CI) were 0.98 (0.92 to 1.04), 0.96 (0.92 to 1.00) and 0.97 (0.86 to 1.10), respectively. In contrast, higher levels of LTPA were inversely associated with mortality for both genders. For example, for women HR for low, moderate and high compared with sedentary LTPA were 0.85 (0.81 to 0.89), 0.78 (0.74 to 0.81) and 0.75 (0.65 to 0.88), respectively. Effects were attenuated when adjusting for income (although data on income were available from only 9 and 6 studies, for men and women, respectively).Conclusion: Our findings indicate that OPA may not result in the same beneficial health effects as LTPA.