A Summary Of Weight Status Data 2016-17 - Tennessee
Tennessee Public Schools:A summary of weight status data2016-17Tennessee Department of Education September 2017
Tennessee Department of EducationOffice of Coordinated School HealthCreated in partnership withThe Tennessee Public Schools Summary of Weight Status Report 2016-17prepared by the Tennessee Department of Health,Division of Policy, Planning and AssessmentOffice of Healthcare Statistics
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17IntroductionThis summary presents weight status results from 307,270 students enrolled in Tennessee public schoolsduring the 2016-17 school year in grades kindergarten, 2, 4, 6, 8, and any one year of high school. Thisreport includes measurements submitted by 141 public school districts in Tennessee.Body Mass Index (BMI) is calculated based on the height and weight measurements collected duringscreening in the current school year. BMI measurements are age and sex specific for children and teens.Some counties and school districts require an active opt in informed consent for BMI student datacollection. This can have a significant impact on the number of students screened.Overweight or obesity prevalence in this report refers to the proportion of public school students foundto be overweight or obese during the school year. Overweight/obese was defined as BMI greater than orequal to the 85th percentile for children of the same age and sex. Statistical significance was determinedbased on the comparison of 95percent confidence intervals.Percentage of Students Assessed,Tennessee Public Schools, 2016-17High School14.6%Kindergarten16.1%Grade 815.0%Grade 216.9%Grade 617.0%Grade 420.3%Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee2
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Key FindingsKey findings include: Overall, 57.6 percent of students had Body Mass Index measurements within normal range, 22.4percent of students were obese, 16.9 percent were overweight, and the remaining 3.2 percent wereunderweight (see figure). The prevalence of overweight or obesity during the 2016-17 school year has significantly decreasedfrom the 2007-08 school year. Students in rural counties had a higher prevalence of overweight/obesity (40.9 percent) compared tothose in metropolitan counties (35.8 percent). Overweight or obesity prevalence increased with increasing grade level through grade 8(kindergarten: 29.7percent; grade 2: 34.4 percent; grade 4: 40.5 percent; grade 6: 43.9 percent; grade8: 44.2 percent; high school: 43.2 percent). Overall, childhood obesity in Tennessee public schools remained steady from 2011-12 to 2015-16school year, around 38.5 percent. There was a significant increase in the prevalence of overweight orobesity to 39.2 percent in the 2016-17 school year compared to 2015-16.Prevalence Trend of Overweight or Obesity,Tennessee Public Schools, 2007-08 to 2016-17Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee3
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Student CharacteristicsAn equal proportion of boys and girls were assessed for the 2016-17 school year (51.3 percent and 48.7percent, respectively). Of those assessed: 16.1 percent were kindergarteners, 16.9 percent were 2ndgraders, 4th graders represented 20.3 percent of the population, 32.0 percent were either 6th or 8thgraders while high schoolers made up 14.6 percent of those screened.Body Weight StatusTennessee Public Schools, mal Weight57.6%* Approximately 2 out of every 5 Tennessee pubic school students (grades K, 2, 4, 6, 8 and one year of highschool) assessed during this period were overweight or obese.Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee4
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Weight Status Distribution by GenderOverall, the normal weight rate among girls was similar to that of boys (57.8 percent vs. 57.4 percentrespectively). Nearly 40 percent of all students were either overweight or obese. The overweight/obesity rate among girls was similar to that of boys (39.4 percent vs. 39.1percentrespectively) (see table). Boys were more likely to be obese than girls (23.3 percent vs. 21.4 percent respectively). However, girls were more likely to be overweight than boys (18.0 percent vs. 15.8 percentrespectively).Weight Status Distribution by Gender,Tennessee Public Schools, 2016-17Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee5
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Weight Status Distribution by Metro Rural CountiesMost students screened were outside of the metropolitan counties1 (67.5 percent). Metropolitan county students were more likely to be normal weight than rural county students(60.1percent vs. 56.4 percent respectively). Rural students were more likely to be obese than metro students (23.6 percent vs. 19.8 percentrespectively). Rural students were more likely to be overweight than metro students (17.3 percent vs. 16.0 percentrespectively).Weight Status Distribution by Metro Rural Counties,Tennessee Public Schools, 2016-17Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee1Davidson, Hamilton, Knox, Madison, Shelby, and Sullivan are considered metropolitan counties and the remaining counties are consideredrural.6
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or Obesity PrevalenceBetween 2007-08 and 2016-17, there was a decline in the prevalence of overweight/obesity inTennessee public schools. The overweight or obesity rate declined in kindergarten, grade 2, grade 4, and grade 6 between2007-08 and 2016-17. The overweight/obesity rate increased in high school for the same period.There was no significant change in the rate for grade 8. The overall overweight/obesity rate increased across all grades in the 2016-17 school yearcompared to the 2015-16 school year (39.2 percent vs. 38.4 percent). The rate increase wassignificant for grade 6 and high school for the same time period.Overweight or Obesity Prevalence by Grade, Tennessee PublicSchools, 2007-08, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee7
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or Obesity by Gender and GradeThe overweight/obesity rate was 40 percent or higher in grade 4, grade 6, grade 8 and high school forboth girls and boys. Boys had the highest rates of overweight/obesity during grades 6 and 8 (44.1percent and 42.9 percentrespectively). Girls had the highest rates of overweight/obesity during grade 8 (45.6 percent). In the rural counties, there was no statistical difference between the overweight/obesity rates of girlsand boys. However, among metropolitan counties, the rate among girls was slightly higher comparedto boys (36.5 percent vs. 35.2 percent respectively).Overweight or Obesity Prevalence by Gender and Grade,Tennessee Public Schools, 2016-17Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee8
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or Obesity Prevalence by CountyThe overweight/obesity prevalence rate varied by county, ranging from 23.8 percent (Williamson County)to 59.4 percent (Henderson County) for the 2016-17 school year (see table). The five counties with the highest overweight/obesity prevalence for the current school year wereHenderson (59.4 percent), Trousdale (57.0 percent), Fayette (54.6 percent), Hancock (51.4 percent),and Grainger (50.0 percent). The five counties with the lowest overweight/obesity prevalence for the current school year wereWilliamson (23.8 percent), Perry (29.6 percent), Knox (30.3 percent), Hamilton (33.1 percent),Cheatham (34.3 percent) and Sevier (34.3 percent). Thirteen (13) counties, with available data for 2007-08 and 2016-17 school years, experienced asignificant decrease in the prevalence of overweight/obesity (Davidson, Franklin, Giles, Houston, Knox,Perry, Putnam, Robertson, Sevier, Sumner, Washington, Williamson, Wilson) in 2016-17 compared to2007-08.Overweight or Obesity Prevalence by County,Tennessee Public Schools, 2016-17Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated SchoolHealth, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville, Tennessee9
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or Obesity Prevalence by School DistrictThe overweight/obesity prevalence rate varied by school district, ranging from 20.1percent (Lakeland) to64.3 percent (Henderson) for the 2016-17 school year (see table). The school districts with the highest overweight/obesity prevalence for the current school year wereHenderson County (64.3 percent), Trousdale County (57.0 percent), Fayette County (54.6 percent),Alvin York (53.9 percent), Hancock County (51.4 percent), and Crockett County (51.4 percent). The five school districts with the lowest overweight/obesity prevalence for the current school yearwere Lakeland (20.1percent), Williamson County 2 (20.6 percent), Collierville (25.3 percent),Germantown (25.4 percent), and Perry County (29.6 percent). Among the school districts with data for both the 2013-14 and 2016-17 school years, the followingdistricts had a lower overweight/obesity rate in 2016-17 than in 2013-14: Giles County, HamblenCounty, Houston County, Knox County, Richard City, Robertson County, Sevier County, Union Countyand Williamson County2. Among the school districts with data for both the 2013-14 and 2016-17 school years, the followingdistricts had a higher overweight/obesity rate in 2016-17 than in 2013-14: Cannon County, Cleveland,Fayette County, Hardeman County, Hardin County, Henderson County, Johnson City, Lebanon SSD,Montgomery County, Rutherford County, Shelby County and Sumner County.2Williamson County school district data does not include Franklin Special School District and differs from county level data.10
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or obesity* prevalence among Tennessee public school students,by county, 2007-08, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 School noxLakeLauderdaleLawrenceLewisPercentoverweightor 4-152015-162016-17PercentPercentPercent95% confidence95% confidence95% confidence95% confidence Change intervalinterval2007-08 toor obeseor obeseor obese2016-1740.940.432.7No Data37.438.139.8No 42.532.446.441.247.144.843.337.141.841.243.937.3No Data41.340.037.143.942.740.3No Data- 41.4- 43.8- 40.6- 44.7- 40.4- 1DecreaseLimited DataLimited seIncreaseDecreaseLimitedDataDecreaseLimited Data
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or obesity* prevalence among Tennessee public school students,by county, 2007-08, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 School an ent95% confidence95% confidence95% confidence95% confidence Change alintervalintervalinterval2007-08 toor obeseor obeseor obeseor .940.940.744.340.629.140.039.440.541.438.039.8No .538.542.840.740.144.939.340.835.940.6No .236.5No 952.642.841.947.444.8- 29.8- 448.542.849.446.836.748.146.949.524.938.3Limited d DataDecreaseIncreaseDecreaseLimited DataDecreaseDecrease*Overweight/obese was defined as BMI greater than or equal to the 85th percentile for children of the same age and sex.Decrease or Increase indicates a statistically significant change from 2007-08 to 2016-17.No Data indicates data was not collected or submitted for the school year.Limited Data indicates change cannot be calculated due to no data available during comparison year.Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated School Health, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville,Tennessee12
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or obesity* prevalence among Tennessee public schoolstudents, by grade, 2007-08, 2015-16 and 2016-17 School Years.2007-08GradeGenderPercentoverweightor obeseAll GradesK2nd4th6th8thHigh School95% confidenceinterval2015-16Percentoverweightor obese95% confidenceinterval2016-17Percentoverweightor obese95% confidence Change from2007-08 tointerval2016-17Both41.1440.91 - 41.3738.4038.23 - 38.5739.2439.06 - 39.41Girls39.5939.27 - 39.9238.3838.13 - 38.6239.3939.15 - 39.64Boys42.5742.25 - 42.8938.4238.18 - 38.6539.0938.84 - 39.33DecreaseBoth33.4832.96 - 34.0029.5429.14 - 29.9329.6629.26 - 30.06DecreaseGirls33.2032.45 - 33.9529.5929.03 - 30.1530.1929.61 - 30.76DecreaseBoys33.7333.01 - 34.4529.4828.94 - 30.0329.1628.60 - 29.72DecreaseBoth39.1038.57 - 39.6434.2633.87 - 34.6434.3933.98 - 34.79DecreaseGirls37.9437.18 - 38.7034.6634.11 - 35.2234.2933.70 - 34.87DecreaseBoys40.1739.44 - 40.9133.8733.33 - 34.4134.4833.91 - 35.05DecreaseBoth44.0643.51 - 44.6139.7139.31 - 40.1040.5140.13 - 40.90DecreaseGirls42.1341.35 - 42.9239.1338.56 - 39.6940.0739.52 - 40.62DecreaseBoys45.8945.12 - 46.6640.2639.71 - 40.8240.9440.40 - 41.48DecreaseBoth45.3944.84 - 45.9542.9142.48 - 43.3443.8643.44 - 44.29DecreaseGirls42.9142.12 - 43.7142.0941.47 - 42.7043.6143.00 - 44.22Boys47.7046.92 - 48.4843.6843.08 - 44.2844.1043.51 - 44.70Both43.3642.79 - 43.9343.3742.92 - 43.8244.2243.77 - 44.67Girls42.0741.25 - 42.8944.3543.70 - 45.0045.5944.94 - 46.25IncreaseBoys44.5343.74 - 45.3242.4741.84 - 43.0942.9542.32 - 43.57DecreaseBoth41.9941.36 - 42.6142.0341.58 - 42.4843.1542.70 - 43.61IncreaseGirls39.5538.66 - 40.4542.0841.43 - 42.7343.3942.73 - 44.05IncreaseBoys44.2243.35 - 45.1041.9841.35 - 42.6142.9342.29 - 43.57DecreaseDecrease*Overweight/obese was defined as BMI greater than or equal to the 85th percentile for children of the same age and sex.Decrease or Increase indicates a statistically significant change from 2007-08 to 2016-17.Data Source: Body Mass Index Data, 2007-08 to 2016-17, Office of Coordinated School Health, Tennessee Department of Education, Nashville,Tennessee13
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or obesity* prevalence among Tennessee public school students, by schooldistrict, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 School Years.2013-14DistrictPercentoverweight orobeseTennessee38.334.642.431.3 - 38.040.4 - 44.3No DataArlington CommunityAthens City38.2 - 38.5overweight orobese38.640.937.4 - 44.3No DataBartlett City Schools2015-1695% confidenceinterval38.4 - 38.8Percentoverweight orobese38.495% confidenceinterval38.2 - 38.62016-17Percentoverweight orobese39.295% confidenceintervalChange from2013-14 to2016-1739.1 - 39.450.645.1 - 56.160.249.7 - 70.844.138.4 - 49.931.429.1 - 33.737.334.9 - 39.734.331.2 - 37.3No Change53.946.0 - 61.9Limited DataNo DataAlvin YorkAnderson CountyintervalNo DataAlamoAlcoa City95% confidence2014-15PercentNo DataNo DataLimited Data40.438.0 - 42.842.340.3 - 44.342.940.9 - 45.0No Change31.429.1 - 33.735.032.8 - 37.332.430.2 - 34.7Limited Data38.735.1 - 42.239.235.4 - 43.037.533.9 - 41.1No Change34.833.2 - 36.430.829.3 - 32.332.530.9 - 34.0Limited DataBedford County44.742.9 - 46.541.439.6 - 43.340.538.7 - 42.243.439.9 - 47.0No ChangeBells City32.125.0 - 39.237.930.7 - 45.133.526.1 - 41.034.126.1 - 42.1No ChangeBenton County46.943.4 - 50.344.541.0 - 48.147.643.9 - 51.343.339.5 - 47.1No ChangeBledsoe County39.335.6 - 43.044.540.5 - 48.540.536.5 - 44.643.137.8 - 48.5No ChangeBlount County41.540.1 - 42.941.740.3 - 43.141.039.6 - 42.440.238.8 - 41.7No ChangeBradford SSD39.832.8 - 46.741.935.4 - 48.337.130.7 - 43.546.640.2 - 53.0No Change38.537.0 - 40.040.038.5 - 41.638.236.7 - 39.8Limited DataNo DataBradley CountyBristol City37.434.9 - 39.839.336.8 - 41.931.028.4 - 33.634.331.8 - 36.9No ChangeCampbell County44.342.3 - 46.346.242.7 - 49.647.144.1 - 50.245.042.1 - 47.9No ChangeCannon County36.232.9 - 39.541.838.2 - 45.440.336.7 - 43.943.539.9 - 47.0IncreaseCarter County43.841.3 - 46.243.641.1 - 46.043.340.9 - 45.743.941.4 - 46.3No ChangeCheatham County32.330.2 - 34.436.734.7 - 38.735.132.9 - 37.334.332.1 - 36.6No ChangeChester County37.834.7 - 40.839.536.4 - 42.637.834.7 - 40.936.132.2 - 40.0No ChangeClaiborne County47.545.0 - 50.050.347.8 - 52.946.944.4 - 49.548.245.6 - 50.8No ChangeClay County41.136.5 - 45.744.940.6 - 49.240.235.8 - 44.639.234.7 - 43.8No ChangeCleveland34.132.6 - 35.638.436.3 - 40.637.335.3 - 39.439.737.7 - 41.8IncreaseClinton City41.737.2 - 46.336.932.3 - 41.541.636.8 - 46.340.235.2 - 45.1No ChangeCocke County45.343.1 - 47.548.745.7 - 51.647.345.0 - 49.748.246.0 - 50.4No ChangeCoffee County40.838.4 - 43.356.053.6 - 58.345.342.9 - 47.845.142.7 - 47.5No Change26.324.6 - 27.924.222.5 - 25.925.323.7 - 26.9Limited DataNo DataColliervilleCrockett County49.545.9 - 53.050.046.5 - 53.550.046.6 - 53.451.448.0 - 54.7No ChangeCumberland County42.841.0 - 44.644.742.9 - 46.542.340.5 - 44.144.742.7 - 46.6No ChangeDavidson County35.635.1 - 36.236.936.3 - 37.536.736.1 - 37.336.636.0 - 37.2No ChangeDayton City37.833.0 - 42.645.942.9 - 48.937.732.6 - 42.836.531.6 - 41.3No ChangeDecatur County45.041.4 - 48.645.341.8 - 48.848.044.4 - 51.647.543.9 - 51.2No ChangeDeKalb County42.039.3 - 44.837.131.4 - 42.745.042.0 - 48.046.844.0 - 49.6No ChangeDickson County40.338.6 - 42.040.839.2 - 42.535.233.5 - 36.937.635.9 - 39.3No ChangeDyer County40.738.3 - 43.040.938.6 - 43.340.838.4 - 43.238.936.5 - 41.3No ChangeDyersburg City42.739.8 - 45.639.636.7 - 42.442.639.6 - 45.543.040.0 - 45.9No ChangeEtowah City35.328.1 - 42.747.339.3 - 55.333.125.9 - 40.439.336.4 - 42.2No ChangeElizabethton40.437.2 - 43.642.539.2 - 45.839.236.2 - 42.342.935.2 - 50.7No ChangeFayette County44.841.9 - 47.743.239.7 - 46.641.238.1 - 44.354.651.4 - 57.7IncreaseFayetteville City37.134.5 - 39.841.837.7 - 45.937.433.6 - 41.236.732.7 - 40.8No ChangeFentress County47.044.1 - 49.850.547.6 - 53.547.044.0 - 50.048.545.4 - 51.7No ChangeFranklin County36.534.5 - 38.538.336.0 - 40.633.731.5 - 35.937.735.3 - 40.0No ChangeNo Data35.032.0 - 38.130.327.8 - 32.833.230.7 - 35.8Limited DataNo DataFranklin SSDGermantown21.019.0 - 22.924.021.8 - 26.325.423.5 - 27.4Limited DataGibson County SSD40.237.8 - 42.640.337.1 - 43.542.740.3 - 45.141.439.0 - 43.7No ChangeGiles County42.540.1 - 44.942.640.0 - 45.132.029.6 - 34.434.532.1 - 36.9DecreaseGrainger County50.648.1 - 53.250.848.3 - 53.350.047.4 - 52.550.047.4 - 52.5No ChangeGreene County43.941.9 - 45.843.641.7 - 45.544.942.9 - 46.843.541.5 - 45.5No ChangeGreeneville City36.033.0 - 39.041.237.0 - 45.339.336.5 - 42.241.038.1 - 43.9No ChangeGrundy County42.539.4 - 45.641.237.6 - 44.938.934.5 - 43.442.037.8 - 46.2No ChangeHamblen County51.750.1 - 53.255.754.2 - 57.244.743.1 - 46.245.644.1 - 47.1DecreaseHamilton County32.031.0 - 33.032.932.0 - 33.834.533.8 - 35.333.132.3 - 33.8No ChangeHancock County46.842.0 - 51.653.949.2 - 58.746.041.1 - 50.851.446.7 - 56.2No Change14
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or obesity* prevalence among Tennessee public school students, by schooldistrict, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 School Years.2013-14DistrictPercentoverweight orobese95% confidenceinterval2014-15Percentoverweight orobese2015-1695% confidenceintervalPercentoverweight orobese95% confidenceinterval2016-17Percentoverweight orobese95% confidenceintervalChange from2013-14 to2016-17Hardeman County40.037.3 - 42.744.441.6 - 47.243.240.2 - 46.346.043.3 - 48.7Hardin County42.139.2 - 45.043.841.0 - 46.740.938.1 - 43.748.746.2 - 51.3IncreaseHawkins County45.243.3 - 47.045.843.8 - 47.845.743.7 - 47.644.642.6 - 46.6No ChangeHaywood County43.841.1 - 46.442.539.8 - 45.242.339.5 - 45.044.842.0 - 47.7No ChangeHenderson County37.034.5 - 39.543.541.0 - 46.044.642.0 - 47.364.361.8 - 66.9IncreaseHenry County45.642.8 - 48.442.639.8 - 45.341.538.2 - 44.841.538.8 - 44.2No ChangeHickman County47.544.8 - 50.349.246.5 - 52.046.143.1 - 49.142.840.2 - 45.4No ChangeHollow Rock-Bruceton45.338.9 - 51.744.037.4 - 50.623.818.3 - 29.343.436.1 - 50.8No ChangeHouston County47.543.2 - 51.841.236.9 - 45.442.237.5 - 46.937.432.1 - 42.7DecreaseHumboldt City49.545.2 - 53.849.845.3 - 54.346.542.1 - 51.051.146.7 - 55.5No ChangeHumphreys County41.738.8 - 44.741.738.7 - 44.844.041.0 - 47.042.939.9 - 46.0No ChangeHuntingdon SSD50.546.0 - 55.143.038.4 - 47.647.342.8 - 51.943.138.7 - 47.4No Change35.829.9 - 41.743.739.2 - 48.344.039.6 - 48.3Limited DataNo ChangeNo DataJackson CountyIncreaseJefferson County37.334.5 - 40.140.036.8 - 43.240.236.8 - 43.638.134.6 - 41.6Johnson City32.530.5 - 34.534.932.9 - 37.034.332.3 - 36.243.740.0 - 47.3IncreaseJohnson County40.236.3 - 44.140.236.5 - 43.843.239.4 - 46.934.532.6 - 36.4No ChangeKingsport City35.834.1 - 37.539.137.4 - 40.935.934.2 - 37.735.333.6 - 37.0No ChangeKnox County32.832.0 - 33.636.135.3 - 36.932.932.2 - 33.630.329.6 - 31.0DecreaseLake County48.643.5 - 53.846.541.3 - 51.752.847.6 - 58.048.443.1 - 53.7No ChangeNo DataLakeland18.614.7 - 22.515.612.1 - 19.120.116.3 - 23.9Limited DataLauderdale County45.443.0 - 47.842.039.7 - 44.349.547.1 - 51.943.941.5 - 46.3No ChangeLawrence County40.538.7 - 42.340.839.0 - 42.640.839.0 - 42.740.038.2 - 41.9No ChangeLebanon SSD41.739.1 - 44.338.435.8 - 41.140.237.6 - 42.848.045.2 - 50.9IncreaseLenoir City45.141.6 - 48.646.541.8 - 51.145.541.1 - 49.846.542.4 - 50.6No ChangeLewis County49.446.0 - 52.947.644.1 - 51.146.643.0 - 50.345.241.4 - 49.1No ChangeLexington City41.337.1 - 45.549.144.5 - 53.747.142.5 - 51.744.640.0 - 49.3No ChangeLincoln County38.536.1 - 41.041.639.0 - 44.240.838.1 - 43.540.437.7 - 43.0No ChangeLoudon County40.538.4 - 42.641.038.7 - 43.340.838.6 - 43.042.440.1 - 44.7No ChangeMacon County46.744.3 - 49.144.241.8 - 46.650.147.7 - 52.542.840.3 - 45.2No ChangeMadison County41.540.1 - 42.842.341.0 - 43.741.840.4 - 43.241.139.8 - 42.5No ChangeManchester City36.933.2 - 40.639.135.2 - 43.039.736.0 - 43.437.433.4 - 41.3No ChangeMarion County40.538.1 - 42.944.742.1 - 47.341.038.4 - 43.544.341.8 - 46.8No ChangeMarshall County45.843.1 - 48.542.640.3 - 45.040.037.4 - 42.641.739.1 - 44.3No ChangeMaryville City35.033.1 - 36.934.732.8 - 36.734.933.0 - 36.932.730.3 - 35.1No ChangeMaury County42.841.3 - 44.440.238.9 - 41.541.740.2 - 43.141.740.3 - 43.1No ChangeMcKenzie SSD46.142.2 - 50.048.144.2 - 51.946.342.2 - 50.440.135.8 - 44.4No ChangeMcMinn County45.042.8 - 47.245.743.5 - 47.946.744.5 - 48.946.444.2 - 48.5No ChangeMcNairy County41.138.9 - 43.443.841.3 - 46.244.342.0 - 46.644.842.4 - 47.2No ChangeMeigs County44.841.2 - 48.447.443.8 - 51.045.341.5 - 49.048.444.3 - 52.5No ChangeMilan SSD39.936.7 - 43.244.240.9 - 47.542.138.7 - 45.541.338.0 - 44.7No ChangeNo DataMillingtonNo Data38.233.0 - 43.335.832.5 - 39.1Limited DataMonroe County46.144.0 - 48.348.446.3 - 50.551.048.0 - 54.048.246.1 - 50.2No ChangeMontgomery County33.832.9 - 34.733.532.6 - 34.433.332.3 - 34.337.536.6 - 38.5IncreaseMoore County45.040.1 - 49.934.429.6 - 39.236.231.2 - 41.341.636.4 - 46.8No ChangeMorgan County41.939.0 - 44.840.938.1 - 43.740.437.5 - 43.339.736.7 - 42.7No ChangeMurfreesboro City34.833.1 - 36.437.335.6 - 38.935.834.2 - 37.435.734.1 - 37.3No ChangeNewport City44.439.5 - 49.342.838.1 - 47.646.641.5 - 51.747.942.9 - 52.9No ChangeOak Ridge City29.126.9 - 31.332.429.3 - 35.430.827.9 - 33.833.931.3 - 36.5No ChangeObion County45.442.9 - 47.846.243.4 - 48.945.342.8 - 47.947.645.0 - 50.3No ChangeOneida SSD47.042.8 - 51.340.636.4 - 44.745.741.3 - 50.142.037.8 - 46.1No ChangeOverton County41.438.7 - 44.141.338.4 - 44.244.541.5 - 47.443.540.6 - 46.3No ChangeParis SSD45.041.8 - 48.243.139.9 - 46.444.440.6 - 48.244.741.2 - 48.2No ChangePerry County37.833.2 - 42.431.526.0 - 37.040.335.5 - 45.129.624.5 - 34.6No ChangePickett County51.245.8 - 56.745.740.3 - 51.055.549.7 - 61.349.343.7 - 55.0No Change15
Summary of TN public school weight status data2016-17Overweight or obesity* prevalence among Tennessee public school students, by schooldistrict, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 School ercentPercentPercentChange from95% confidence95% confidence95% confidence95% confidenceoverweight oroverweight oroverweight oroverweight or2013-14 bese2016-17Polk County41.138.2 - 44.037.434.4 - 40.439.936.9 - 42.939.836.7 - 42.8No ChangePutnam County39.137.4 - 40.938.236.0 - 40.437.435.3 - 39.537.835.6 - 40.1No ChangeRhea County42.340.0 - 44.737.935.6 - 40.244.642.2 - 47.041.839.4 - 44.2No ChangeRichard City75.267.6 - 82.841.632.0 - 51.238.229.6 - 46.847.236.8 -
Overweight or obesity prevalence in this report refers to the proportion of public school students found to be overweight or obese during the school year. Overweight/obese was defined as BMI greater than or equal to the 85th percentile for children of the
body weight where dry body weight is the ideal body weight of the respondent12). Dry weight is the bodyweight without excess fluid that has accumulated between the two hemodialysis treatments. This dry weight can be equated with the weight of people with healthy kidneys after urinating13). Interdialytic Weight Gain (IDWG) is the patient's .
Nutrition Evaluation: 1. Present Weight: Height (no shoes): Desired Weight: 2. In what time frame would you like to be at your desired weight? 3. Birth Weight: Weight at 20 years of age: Weight one year ago: 4. What is the main reason for your decision to lose weight?
tionsbefore using the weight bench. 1. Read all instructions in this manual and all 11. The weight bench is designed to support a warnings on the weight bench before using maximum user weight of 300 Ibs. (136 kg) the weight bench. Use the weight bench only and a maximum total weight of 510 Ibs. (231 as described in this manual, kg).
increases during the day, the maximum allowable weight may have to be reduced to keep the helicopter within its capability. The following terms are used when computing a helicopter’s weight: Basic Empty Weight Maximum Gross Weight Weight Limitations Basic Empty Weight The
Rapid weight loss is not associated with an increased risk of weight regain Rapid weight loss, e.g. a 10% reduction in body weight over five weeks, is associated with the same risk of weight regain after nine months, compared to a 10% reduction in body weight over three months.9 Therefore, even though diets that
marked weight gain group the mean weight gain was 11.4 kg 4.9 kg (range 5.5-30.1 kg). The mean overall weight change in the 70 patients was 6.9 kg 5.8 kg (range —4.0-30.1 kg). The highest maximum weight gain observed was 54% of initial body weight for VPA. This corresponded to a 30 kg weight gain over a period of 15 months.
pads _ Weight of all wet pads - total weight of dry pads Total weight of pads _ Dry pad weight _ Record # of pads used and weight of each 2 oz. Pad #1 -4 oz. Pad # 2 -3 oz. Pad #3 -4 oz. Pad #4 -3 oz. Pad #5 -5 oz. Pad #6 -4 oz. pads - Total Pads Used _ X weight of dry pad _ Weight of all wet pads .
RightFax - Deciphering the Resulting Status Codes in RightFax . Summary: RightFax shows a status message for each fax in Faxutil and Webutil. To learn more about why a fax transmission may have failed, the fax history includes status codes that offer concise information. . 318 Dial tone after dialing Error: Phoneline Problem 324 Silence, no .File Size: 475KBPage Count: 9Explore furtherDeciphering the Resulting Status Codes in RightFax .rightfax.atechnologies.comDeciphering the Resulting Status Codes in RightFax .atechnologies.comSolved: Rightfax 9.3 failed faxes Experts Exchangewww.experts-exchange.comSupport RightFax Resource Centerrightfax.atechnologies.comSolved: RightFax Receive failure (Phase B). Experts Exchangewww.experts-exchange.comRecommended to you b
