Trial reportJournal of pediatric psychology2024
A randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of a brief Triple P discussion group to increase healthy feeding practices and reduce risk factors for infant obesity.
Trial report in Journal of pediatric psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTest the efficacy of a brief 2-hr parenting intervention in increasing protective factors against and reducing risk factors for infant obesity.
methodA 2 (Baby Healthy Living Triple P vs. care-as-usual) × 3 (baseline, postintervention, 6-month follow-up) design was used. Eighty-two parents of 4- to 18-month-old infants meeting at least two risk factors for early childhood obesity (e.g., parent/child overweight, low education level) were randomized to intervention (n = 42) or control group (n = 40). Parents questionnaires and child weight status was measured.
resultsResults showed an intervention effect on a primary outcome, early feeding practices (restrictive: d = 0.44, 95% CI [-0.01,0.88], pressuring: d = 0.11, 95% CI [-0.32,0.54], nonresponsive behaviors: (d = 0.32, 95% CI [-0.11,0.75]), and on a secondary outcome, feeding beliefs (d = 0.29, 95% CI [-0.14,0.73]). No beneficial impact was found on other primary outcomes (responsiveness in feeding: quantity d = 0.50, 95% CI [-0.03,1.03]) and nutritive d = 0.52, 95% CI [-0.03,1.07], mealtime environment: d = 0.35, 95% CI [-0.78,0.08], self-efficacy in responsive feeding: d = 0.21, 95% CI [-0.22,0.64]), or secondary outcomes (parental self-efficacy: d = 0.08, 95% CI [-0.50,0.35]), parent emotional eating (d = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.43,0.43]), food restraint (d = 0.42, 95% CI [-0.85,0.02]), and body satisfaction (d = 0.01, 95% CI [-0.43,0.43]) and child weight status (d = 0.11, 95% CI [-0.54,0.32]).
conclusionsPromising though limited support was demonstrated for a brief, low-intensity program to help parents in the prevention of obesity for infants at risk.
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.