Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25366542›Full record

Trial reportThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2014

Mediators of improved child diet quality following a health promotion intervention: the Melbourne InFANT Program.

Alison C Spence, Karen J Campbell, David A Crawford, Sarah A McNaughton, Kylie D Hesketh

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Alison C SpenceCentre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia. a.spence@deakin.edu.au.
Karen J CampbellCentre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia. karen.campbell@deakin.edu.au.
David A CrawfordCentre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia. david.crawford@deakin.edu.au.
Sarah A McNaughtonCentre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia. sarah.mcnaughton@deakin.edu.au.
Kylie D HeskethCentre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, Victoria, 3125, Australia. kylie.hesketh@deakin.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundYoung children's diets are currently suboptimal. Given that mothers have a critical influence on children' diets, they are typically a target of interventions to improve early childhood nutrition. Understanding the maternal factors which mediate an intervention's effect on young children's diets is important, but has not been well investigated. This research aimed to test whether maternal feeding knowledge, maternal feeding practices, maternal self-efficacy, and maternal dietary intakes acted as mediators of the effect of an intervention to improve child diet quality.

methodsThe Melbourne Infant Feeding Activity and Nutrition Trial (InFANT) Program was a cluster-randomized controlled trial, conducted from 2008-2010. This novel, low-dose, health promotion intervention was delivered quarterly over 15 months and involved educational activities, promotion of peer discussion, a DVD and written materials. Post-intervention, when children were approximately 18 months of age, child diets were assessed using multiple 24-hour recalls and a purpose-developed index of diet quality, the Obesity Protective Dietary Index. Maternal mediators were assessed using a combination of previously validated and purpose-deigned tools. Mediation analysis was conducted using the test of joint significance and difference of coefficients methods.

resultsAcross 62 parents' groups in Melbourne, Australia, 542 parents were recruited. Post- intervention, higher maternal feeding knowledge and lower use of foods as rewards was found to mediate the direct intervention effect on child diet quality. While other aspects of maternal feeding practices, self-efficacy and dietary intakes did not act as mediators, they were associated with child diet quality.

conclusionsMediation analysis of this novel health promotion intervention showed the importance of maternal feeding knowledge and use of foods as rewards in impacting child diet quality. The other maternal factors assessed were appropriate targets but further research on how to impact these in an intervention is important. This evidence of intervention efficacy and mediation provides important insights for planning future interventions.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN81847050, registered 23 November 2007.

Indexed as

DietHealth EducationInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaAdultAustraliaEducational StatusHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PromotionHumansInfantMental RecallMothersNutritional StatusParentingSelf EfficacySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25366542
PMCPMC4230360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.