MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617084380 · doi:10.2196/publichealth.6492

Associations Between Maternal Depressive Symptoms and Nonresponsive Feeding Styles and Practices in Mothers of Young Children: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2617084380 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ana Cristina Lindsay, Tatiana Mesa, Mary L. Greaney, Sherrie Flynt Wallington, Julie Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParenting stylesChildhood obesityPsychological interventionPublic healthDevelopmental psychologyObesityPsychologyDepressive symptomsEarly childhoodMedicineClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryOverweightAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity is a significant global public health problem due to increasing rates worldwide. Growing evidence suggests that nonresponsive parental feeding styles and practices are important influences on children's eating behaviors and weight status, especially during early childhood. Therefore, understanding parental factors that may influence nonresponsive parental feeding styles and practices is significant for the development of interventions to prevent childhood obesity. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this systematic review were to (1) identify and review existing research examining the associations between maternal depressive symptoms and use of nonresponsive feeding styles and practices among mothers of young children (2-8 years of age), (2) highlight the limitations of reviewed studies, and (3) generate suggestions for future research. METHODS: Using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) guidelines, six electronic academic databases were searched for peer-reviewed, full-text papers published in English between January 2000 and June 2016. Only studies with mothers 18+ years old of normally developing children between 2 and 8 years of age were included. Of the 297 citations identified, 35 full-text papers were retrieved and 8 were reviewed. RESULTS: The reviewed studies provided mixed evidence for associations between maternal depressive symptoms and nonresponsive feeding styles and practices. Two out of three studies reported positive associations with nonresponsive feeding styles, in that mothers with elevated depressive symptoms were more likely than mothers without those symptoms to exhibit uninvolved and permissive or indulgent feeding styles. Furthermore, results of reviewed studies provide good evidence for association between maternal depressive symptoms and instrumental feeding (3 of 3 reviewed studies) and nonresponsive family mealtime practices (3/3), but mixed evidence for pressuring children to eat (3/6) and emotional feeding (1/3). In addition, evidence for the association between maternal depressive symptoms and restricting child food intake was mixed: one study (1/6) found a positive association; two studies (2/6) found a negative association; whereas one study (1/6) found no association. CONCLUSIONS: This review indicates that the results of studies examining the associations between maternal depressive symptoms and parental feeding styles and practices are mixed. Limitations of studies included in this review should be noted: (1) the use of a diverse set of self-report questionnaires to assess parental feeding practices is problematic due to potential misclassification and makes it difficult to compare these outcomes across studies, thus caution must be taken in drawing conclusions; and (2) the majority of included studies (6/8) were cross-sectional. There is a need for additional longitudinal studies to disentangle the influence of depression on parental feeding styles and practices. Nevertheless, given that depressive symptoms and feeding styles and practices are potentially modifiable, it is important to understand their relationship to inform obesity prevention interventions and programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.008
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207