4.5 Article

Maternal restriction of children's eating and encouragements to eat as the 'non-shared environment': a pilot study using the child feeding questionnaire

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY
卷 30, 期 11, 页码 1670-1675

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803318

关键词

parental feeding styles; childhood overweight; shared environment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This pilot study tested whether maternal feeding attitudes and styles towards children are part of the 'shared' or 'non-shared' home environment. A secondary aim was to test whether within-family differences in maternal feeding attitudes and styles relate to within-family differences in child weight status. Methods: Mothers of 3- to7-year-old sibling pairs (N=15 pairs) completed the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ), which assessed feeding attitudes (perceived responsibility, perceived child overweight and child weight concern) and feeding styles (monitoring, restriction and pressure to eat) towards children. Mothers rated each sibling separately. Child weight and height were measured and converted to body mass index (BMI) z-scores. Intraclass correlations tested the familial associations for each CFQ subscale. Pearson's correlations tested whether within-family differences in CFQ subscales were related to within-family differences in child BMI z-scores. Results: Perceived responsibility (rho=0.77, P=0.0004), perceived child overweight (rho=0.99, P < 0.0001) and monitoring (rho=0.57, P=0.01) showed significant familial correlations. Mothers reported significantly greater weight concern (r=0.85, P=0.02) and reduced pressure to eat (r=-0.80, P=0.03) towards heavier than thinner children within families. Conclusion: Whether or not maternal feeding practices are shared or non-shared components of the home environment depends on the specific feeding domain being measured. Restrictive feeding practices and encouragements to eat by mothers might be tested as non-shared environmental variables in genetics studies of childhood obesity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据