4.1 Review

Choice of foods and ingredients for moderately malnourished children 6 months to 5 years of age

期刊

FOOD AND NUTRITION BULLETIN
卷 30, 期 3, 页码 S343-S404

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/15648265090303S303

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is consensus on how to treat severe malnutrition, but there is no agreement on the most cost-effective way to treat infants and young children with moderate malnutrition who consume cereal-dominated diets. The aim of this review is to give an overview of the nutritional qualities of relevant foods and ingredients in relation to the nutritional needs of children with moderate malnutrition and to identify research needs. The following general aspects are covered: energy density, macronutrient content and quality, minerals and vitamins, bioactive substances, antinutritional factors, and food processing. The nutritional values of the main food groups-cereals, legumes, pulses, roots, vegetables, fruits, and animal foods-are discussed. The special beneficial qualities Of animal-source foods, which contain high levels of minerals important for growth, high-quality protein, and no antinutrients or fibers, are emphasized. In cereal-dominated diets, the plant foods should be processed to reduce the contents of antinutrients and fibers. Provision of a high fat content to increase energy density is emphasized, however, the content of micronutrients should also be increased to maintain nutrient density. The source of fat should be selected to supply optimal amounts of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), especially n-3 fatty acids. Among multiple research needs, the following are highlighted: to identify the minimum quantity of animal foods needed to support acceptable child growth and development, to examine the nutritional gains of reducing contents of antinutrients and fibers in cereal and legume-based diets, and to examine the role of fat quality, especially PUFA content and ratios, in children with moderate malnutrition.

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

4.1
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