Consumption of Ultraprocessed Foods in a Sample of Adolescents With Obesity and Its Association With the Food Educational Style of Their Parent: Observational Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Both parental education and the food environment influence dietary intake and may therefore contribute to childhood obesity. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the consumption of ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) in a convenience sample of adolescents with obesity and to determine its association with the food educational style of their parent. METHODS: This observational study included 24 participants, 12 adolescents (8 boys and 4 girls) aged from 12 to 14 years and their 12 parents, who were followed in a specialized pediatric obesity clinic in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. The adolescents were asked to take a photograph with a smartphone application of all meals and beverages consumed in their daily routine over 14 consecutive days. They evaluated their parent's food educational style using the Kids' Child Feeding Questionnaire. The parent who was present at the study visits also completed the Feeding Style Questionnaire. A dietitian analyzed the pictures to extract food group portions and to identify UPFs using the NOVA classification. A nonparametric statistical test was used to investigate associations between UPF intake and food educational style. RESULTS: Overall, the adolescents had unbalanced dietary habits compared to national recommendations. They consumed an insufficient quantity of vegetables, fruits, dairy products, and starchy foods and an excessive amount of meat portions and sugary and fatty products compared to the current Swiss recommendations. Their consumption of UPFs accounted for 20% of their food intake. All adolescents defined their parent as being restrictive in terms of diet, with a mean parental restriction score of 3.3±SD 0.4 (norm median=2.1). No parent reported a permissive food educational style. A higher intake of UPFs was associated with a lower parental restriction score (P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Despite being followed in a specialized pediatric obesity clinic, this small group of adolescents had an unbalanced diet, which included 20% UPFs. The intake of UPFs was lower in participants whose parent was more restrictive, suggesting the importance of parents as role models and to provide adequate food at home. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03241121; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03241121.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».