5; 95%CI: 13.4–15.6). Female sex, having completed 15 years, black skin color, and lower socioeconomic level were associated with displaying at least three risk behaviors, in both crude and adjusted analyses. There was no association with maternal schooling. In the present study, we investigated the prevalence and clustering of the four most important behavioral risk factors for the development of CNCDs, namely smoking, alcohol intake, physical inactivity, and low fruit intake (WHO, 2005). Our results show that, with the exception of

smoking, the remaining factors were present among both boys and girls at frequencies higher than 20%. Factors such as physical activity and low fruit intake were present in more than half of the studied population. We also show that these risk factors tend to cluster together. This was particularly the case for smoking and alcohol intake, which were more frequent among male adolescents. Interest in the Tanespimycin concentration prevalence of risk factors for CNCDs among adolescents has increased considerably in the last decade (Beck et al., 2011, Modulators Christofaro et al., 2011, Farias Júnior et al., 2011 and Romanzini et al., 2008). One of the reasons

behind this increase is the fact that defining the early risk profile may help to design public measures aimed at preventing these behaviors, especially measures combining health and educational interventions. DAPT cell line One of the strengths of the present study is that it investigates clusters of CNCD risk factors, in contrast to most other surveys with adolescents, which focus on isolated behaviors. Furthermore, most L-NAME HCl studies investigating clusters of risk factors were done on adult populations (Poortinga, 2007 and Schuit et al., 2002), and the few that include adolescents were carried out in high-income countries (Alamian and Paradis, 2009, Andersen et al., 2003 and Lawlor et al., 2005). Despite its innovative approach, the present analysis has certain limitations, which should be considered. Given that our study was based on a birth cohort, the extrapolation of these results to adolescents

in general must be done with caution, given the narrow age range covered. Another limitation is the low prevalence of smoking in the present survey, which differs from that detected in most other studies with adolescents (Beck et al., 2011 and Horta et al., 2007). It is important to bear in mind that this may be the result of omission of smoking habits by some of the subjects. Even though questionnaires were confidential, it is possible that subjects may have been hesitant to report the use of tobacco. Such a trend was reported in another survey that measured cotinine levels among students in the same city (Malcon et al., 2008). This study showed poor agreement between self-reported smoking and cotinine levels, suggesting that adolescents underreported cigarette smoking (Malcon et al., 2008).