ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2013
Interruption of scheduled, automatic feeding and reduction of excess energy intake in toddlers.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Total energy expenditure measured by doubly labeled water method in children and adolescents: a systematic review.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2023Article
- Estimated Energy Requirements of Infants and Young Children up to 24 Months of Age.Current developments in nutrition · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChildhood obesity due to the consumption of excess calories is a severe problem in developed countries. In a previous investigation on toddlers, hospital laboratory measurements showed an association of food-demand behavior with constant lower blood glucose before meals than for scheduled meals. We hypothesize that maternal scheduling of meals for toddlers results in excess energy intake compared to feeding only on demand (previously "on request").
objectiveWe tested the cross-sectional null hypothesis of no difference in energy intake between scheduled (automatic) and demanded meals (administered after evaluation) in 24 mother-toddler (21 months old at entry) pairs with chronic, nonspecific diarrhea presenting at a clinic. We tested the same hypothesis in a subset of 14 toddlers by measuring the resting (sleeping) metabolic rate 4 hours after lunch, as well as the total daily energy expenditure (TEE) in 10 toddlers.
methodsWe trained mothers to recognize meal demands (as in the previous investigation) and to provide food in response, but required no blood glucose measurements before meals. Energy intake was assessed by a 10-day food diary, resting metabolic rate (RMR) by respiratory analyses (indirect calorimetry) in 14 toddlers, and TEE by doubly labeled water in 10 toddlers. Their blood parameters, anthropometry, and number of days with diarrhea were assessed before training and 50 days after training.
resultsRMR decreased from 58.6 ± 7.8 to 49.0 ± 9.1 kcal/kg/d (P < 0.001) and TEE decreased from 80.1 ± 6.9 to 67.8 ± 10.0 kcal/kg/d (P < 0.001). Energy intake decreased from 85.7 ± 15.3 to 70.3 ± 15.8 kcal/kg/d (P < 0.001). The height Z-score increased significantly, while weight growth was normal. Toddlers entering the study over the median RMR decreased their RMR significantly more than those below the median RMR (P < 0.01).
conclusionScheduled meal suspension induces meal demand frequency to increase. Demanded meals are associated with significantly lower energy intake, RMR, and TEE than scheduled meals. Feeding on demand may be an effective skill in a strategy for reducing excess energy intake in the long term and in regulating body weight in toddlers and children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.