Feeding Challenges in Trisomy 21: Prevalence and Characteristics of Feeding Disorders and Food Neophobia—A Cross-Sectional Study of Polish Children and Adolescents with Down Syndrome
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Food neophobia, defined as reluctance to try new foods, may lead to nutritional deficiencies and complicate dietary management—especially in individuals with Down syndrome, who often present with oral-motor dysfunction. This condition may result in nutritional deficiencies and difficulties in adhering to dietary recommendations, particularly in individuals with comorbidities. In individuals with Down syndrome (DS), who frequently present with oral motor disorders and chronic diseases, the problem may be especially pronounced. Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess the risk of food neophobia and feeding difficulties in children, adolescents, and young adults with Down syndrome, as well as their associations with age, gender, and body weight. Methods: The research was conducted using the CAWI method among 310 caregivers of individuals with DS in Poland. Two validated tools were employed: the Montreal Children’s Hospital Feeding Scale (MCH-FS) and the Food Neophobia Scale for Children (FNSC). Body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and demographic data were also analyzed. Results: Findings revealed that the majority of participants (55.2%) had normal body weight, while 19.4% were undernourished and 6.5% were classified as obese. Feeding difficulties of moderate to very high severity were reported in 26.5% of the participants. A high risk of food neophobia was identified in 41.3% of respondents, most frequently in the preschool age group. A statistically significant association was observed between age and the severity of both feeding difficulties and neophobia (p < 0.05). However, no significant relationships were found with gender or body weight. Conclusions: Feeding difficulties and food neophobia are prevalent among individuals with Down syndrome, particularly in preschool-aged children. The findings highlight the necessity of an interdisciplinary therapeutic approach and the individualization of dietary interventions, taking developmental age into account. Further studies are warranted, with consideration of environmental and psychosocial factors.
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 ».