ArticleNutrients2022
Translation and Modification of a Mindful Eating Questionnaire for Children Assisted by Item Response Theory in Chinese Children and Adolescents.
Article in Nutrients, 2022. 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.
- Dynamic interplay between food addiction, psychological and behavioral factors, and weight-related measures: A longitudinal network analysis in developing youth.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2026Article
- Dietary Assessment for Weight Management and Health Maintenance.Nutrients · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mindful eating has gained attention in studies on healthy eating. However, measurement of it is scarce, particularly in pediatrics. This study aimed to translate and modify the 12-item Mindful Eating Questionnaire for Children (MEQ-C) using techniques based on both classical test theory (ICC) and item response theory (IRT) in Chinese children and adolescents. Of the 426 participants enrolled and randomly grouped, the test (n = 223) and validation (n = 203) subsamples were well-matched in age, gender, body mass index z score (BMIz), and waist to height ratio (WHtR) (p > 0.556). Three items were eliminated due to deviating from the mindful eating concept (content validity index < 0.71) and presenting as an independent dimension in parallel analysis, or yielding a poor distribution (−4.331 < b < −0.111). The final 5-item Mindless Eating and 4-item Awareness subscales were identified with sound Cronbach’s α of 0.802 and 0.779, respectively. The remaining items functioned well (a > 1, −3 < b < 3), and the Mindless Eating subscale was accurate for the low-to-medium range (−2 to 0) of the mindful eating measure. The Awareness one was reliable for the relatively high range (0 to 2). Participants’ mindful eating characteristics should be taken into consideration in practice.
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.