ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2023
Examining the feasibility of a brief parent intervention designed to promote positive food communication with infants.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- High shape and weight importance in adolescence relates to worse body image in the first perinatal period.Eating behaviors · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew prevention interventions exist focusing on supporting parents to use positive food communication at mealtimes, for the prevention of disordered eating. "Mealtime chatter matters (MCM)" is a brief intervention designed for parents of infants. The intervention was designed in collaboration with child health nurses (CHNs) to be embedded into usual care. The overall aim of this study was to test the feasibility of the intervention through examining the acceptability of the MCM content and resources and the potential impact of the intervention on parents.
methodsThis pilot study utilised a mixed methods approach and took place within a regional child health service in Queensland, Australia (October 2021 to June 2022). Participants were parents of infants attending child health education groups and CHNs. The intervention consisted of a brief education session (including accompanying resources), facilitated by a Paediatric Dietitian. The acceptability of MCM content and resources was assessed by both parents and CHNs via self-reported questionnaires and the potential impact on parents assessed via pre-/post-self-reported questionnaires.
resultsForty-six parents of infants (aged < 8 months) and six CHNs who hosted the intervention and observed the program's delivery participated in the study. MCM content and resources were highly acceptable to parents and CHNs, as both qualitative and quantitative data concurred. How the program may have potentially impacted parenting practices was unclear from the survey results and further investigation is required to better understand these. Tangible lessons and opportunities to further test this intervention were clear from current results.
conclusionOverall, MCM was acceptable to both parents and CHNs, with the content and resources both being highly valued. Parents reported the content to be informative and engaging and CHNs were keen to have such an intervention available in the future. However, further modification and testing is required of MCM. This feasibility study is an essential first step in supporting parents and CHNs to access an evidence-based intervention with the aim of preventing disordered eating.
trial registrationGriffith University Human Research Ethics Committee (2021/577) and Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (QGC/76618).
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.