4.2 Article

Compliant Eating of Maternally Prompted Food Predicts Increased Body Mass Index z-Score Gain in Girls: Results from a Population- Based Sample

期刊

CHILDHOOD OBESITY
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 427-436

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/chi.2012.0098

关键词

-

资金

  1. CDC through the ATPM/CDC/ATSDR [TS 318-15/15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Poorer division of responsibility'' (DoR) feeding, characterized by high parental control and reduced child food choice, may promote pediatric obesity, although population-based prospective data are lacking. We tested whether poorer DoR feeding predicts childhood overweight/obesity onset and BMI z-score gain, over 10 years in the National Longitudinal Study of Youth. Methods: We studied 302 girls and 316 boys, with mean ages 52.24 and 52.35 months, respectively, in 1986, who were followed for 10 years. We excluded children who were initially overweight/obese. Mothers completed three DoR feeding questions in 1986: (1) child eating compliance of prompted foods; (2) child eating compliance of initially refused foods; and (3) mother-allotted child food choice. Child BMI (kg/m(2)) was calculated from measured weights and heights in 1986, 1988, 1992, 1994, and 1996. Results: Daughters who complied with maternal food prompts [odds ratio (OR), 2.01] and those who obeyed maternal prompts to consume initially rejected foods (OR, 2.29) most of the time'' were significantly more likely than daughters who complied less frequently to become overweight/obese after 8 years. Also, more frequent eating compliance (p < 0.001) and more frequent compliance of initially rejected foods (p = 0.003) predicted greater BMI z-score gain in girls. These associations were not found for boys. Maternal obesity consistently predicted overweight/obesity risk in girls (ORs, 2.48-8.63) and boys (ORs, 2.27-4.03). Conclusions: Teaching parents to avoid coercive feeding practices, while encouraging child self-selection of healthier foods, may help their daughters to achieve better energy balance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据