ArticleScientific reports2025
Development and validation of peaters choice, an intervention module for healthcare practitioners in managing picky eating among children aged 3-5 years.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Association Between Picky Eating and Stunting Among Ethnic Minority Children Aged 12-35 Months in a Mountainous Area of Northern Vietnam: A Cross-Sectional Study.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Picky eating (PE) during early childhood is a growing concern, often linked to poor dietary intake and increased parental stress. While healthcare professionals (HCPs) are well-positioned to assist, there remains a lack of structured, evidence-based modules to guide PE management in public health settings. This research aim to develop a validated healthy eating intervention module for HCPs in managing picky eaters (PEaters Choice). The module development followed the first three phases of the ADDIE instructional design model: Analysis, Design, and Development. Phase 1 (Analysis) involved a scoping review, a quantitative, and qualitative study, while Phase 2 (Design) focused on designing the module content and aligning activities with relevant theoretical frameworks. In Phase 3 (Development), nine experts evaluated the newly developed module using face and content validity forms. Findings from Phases 1 and 2 informed a multidisciplinary module design, guiding its objectives, content, and delivery based on evidence and stakeholder input. In general, the PEaters Choice module surpassed established benchmarks, achieving high validity scores (> 80%) and S-CVI/Ave (> 0.80). Face validity results also confirmed the module's relevance, clarity of instruction, and alignment with its intended objectives of empowering HCPs to effectively manage pediatric PE in the public health setting. The PEaters Choice module demonstrates strong preliminary validity and offers a structured tool to assist HCPs in managing PE among children. While implementation and impact evaluation remain future steps, the current version provides a foundation for broader application and potential to empower both HCPs and parents.
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.