Trial reportThe Journal of nutrition2022
Children's Portion Selection Is Predicted by Food Liking and Is Related to Intake in Response to Increased Portions.
Trial report in The Journal of nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02759523 (Neural Mechanisms Underlying Children's Responses to Food Portion Size and Energy Density), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Neural Mechanisms Underlying Children's Responses to Food Portion Size and Energy Density
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- "The Big Three" properties of food that drive intake.Physiology & behavior · 2025Review
- Causal relationships between dietary factors and spinal diseases: a univariable and multivariable Mendelian randomization study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Validity of the PortionSize Smartphone Application for Estimating Dietary Intake in Free-Living Conditions: A Pilot Study.Journal of nutrition education and behavior · 2024Article
- PACE: a Novel Eating Behavior Phenotype to Assess Risk for Obesity in Middle Childhood.The Journal of nutrition · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhen children choose amounts of food to eat, it is unclear what influences the portions they select and whether their selections are related to the amounts they consume.
objectivesUsing a computer survey, we investigated the effect of food liking on portion selection in middle childhood and examined how children's selections were related to measured intake at meals in which portions of all foods were varied across 4 test days.
methodsFifty-one children aged 7-10 y completed a computer survey of 20 common foods with a range of energy density. For each food, the survey presented sliding scales with 5 images varying in portion size and children indicated their liking and the amount they would eat at a specified meal or snack. On 4 test days in a randomized crossover design, children were served a meal of 6 foods from the survey with portions of 100%, 133%, 167%, or 200% of baseline amounts. Data were analyzed using random coefficients models.
resultsAcross the 20 foods used in the survey, portion selection ratings were predicted by food liking ratings (P < 0.0001). After accounting for liking, portion selection ratings did not vary by food energy density (P = 0.50). At the meals, intake of all 6 foods increased when larger portions were served (P = 0.002). Furthermore, the selected portion of a food on the survey was positively related both to intake of that food at the 100%-portion meal (P = 0.014) and to increased intake as larger portions were served (P < 0.0001).
conclusionsChildren aged 7-10 y were able to use a computer survey to choose food portions that predicted their measured intake in response to increased portions. The relation of liking to selection and intake indicates that to promote children's consumption of larger portions of low-energy-dense foods such as fruits and vegetables, these foods must be well liked by the children. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02759523.
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.