Parental knowledge, perceptions and consumption of milk and alternatives relates to intakes of young children 2–8 y of age
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A low intake of milk and alternatives is concerning for children, since vitamin D, calcium and other nutrients in these foods are important for growth and development. Canadian research is ambiguous on how parental nutrition knowledge impacts the dietary intake of their children. Because of this, the objective was to assess the relationship between parental knowledge/perceptions of milk and alternatives and the intake of their child. This was a cross sectional analysis, during April and May 2015, of healthy participants (BMI z‐score > −2 and < 2), 2–8 y (n= 49) from a 6 month randomized vitamin D trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02387892) in Montreal, Canada. The self‐reported parental knowledge and perceptions survey had 2 sections, one about general knowledge and perceptions and the second had specific questions about their child. Milk and alternatives and vitamin D intake were assessed using a validated 30 day food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Pearson partial correlations, Bland‐Altman plots of agreement and mixed model ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc testing were used. The participants (5.6 ± 1.9 y) were 59% (29/49) male, had mean BMI z‐scores of 0.65 ± 0.84, and only 2% (1/49) of children did not reach the recommended 2 servings/day of milk and alternatives by Canada's Food Guide (CFG). Sixty seven percent of families had incomes above $65,000 Canadian and 70% of parents had university level education. There was a significant partial correlation between parental milk and alternatives intake and FFQ child milk and alternatives intake (r = 0.59, p = 0.001). Also, when parents consumed milk and alternatives at meals with their child, children consumed significantly more servings of this food group throughout the day (). There was a small bias (0.314, 95% CI: −2.56 to 3.19) between the FFQ milk product intake and the perceived milk and alternatives intakes (). Though 82% of parents correctly identified CFG serving sizes of fluid milk, less than 25% correctly identified the serving sizes of yogurt and cheese (). Sixty three percent of parents thought the number of servings of milk and alternatives that children needed per day was higher than the CFG recommendations. Non‐white children consumed significantly more (p < 0.05) milk and alternatives than white children. Age and sex however, did not associate with milk and alternatives intake. These results suggest that parental milk and alternatives intake as well as knowledge of CFG may have a significant impact on the amount of milk and alternatives served to children. Future longitudinal research should test whether educating parents about milk and alternatives significantly changes the amount of these products they serve to their young children. Support or Funding Information This work was supported by funding from Dairy Farmers of Canada, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and Canada Research Chairs. Dairy Farmers of Canada did not have a role in design, implementation, analysis or interpretation. Proportions of parents who correctly identified Canada's Food Guide (CFG) servings and serving sizes. Question Proportion of parents correctly answering CFG serving size of fluid milk 82% CFG serving size of yogurt: Solid 16% Beverage 24% CFG serving size of cheese 13% CFG recommended servings/day of milk and alternatives 32% Servings/day for 2–8 year olds
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».