Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37460785›Full record

ReviewCurrent nutrition reports2023

Conceptual Considerations and Methodological Challenges to Measuring Food Acceptance During Infancy.

Kameron J Moding, Elizabeth I Kielb

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current nutrition reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Kameron J ModingDepartment of Human Development & Family Science, Purdue University, 1200 Mitch Daniels Blvd, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA. kmoding@purdue.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2680-8257
Elizabeth I KielbDepartment of Human Development & Family Science, Purdue University, 1200 Mitch Daniels Blvd, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to (1) present a conceptual definition of infant food acceptance, (2) explore methodological challenges to measuring different components of food acceptance, and (3) provide recommendations for future research on food acceptance during infancy. RECENT

findingsInfant food acceptance includes separate but overlapping components: wanting, liking, and consumption. Recent evidence suggests that although these components are often correlated, there is variability in the sensitivity of these measures to detect differences in infants' responses to target foods. To date, consumption and caregiver perceptions of liking have been the primary outcome measures of interest in studies of infant food acceptance. More diverse and precise measures across the three components of infant food acceptance are needed to address a wider scope of research questions, which would in turn strengthen the interpretability and translational potential of research in this area.

Indexed as

Food PreferencesInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaEmotionsHumansInfantInfant FoodBehavioral codingComplementary feedingFood acceptanceInfantsMeasurement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.