MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904954899 · doi:10.3390/nu10121992

A Narrative Review of Childhood Picky Eating and Its Relationship to Food Intakes, Nutritional Status, and Growth

2018· review· en· W2904954899 on OpenAlexaff
Tinu Mary Samuel, Kathy Musa‐Veloso, Manki Ho, Carolina Venditti, Yasaman Shahkhalili

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsIntertek (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrative reviewEnvironmental healthDietary fiberPsychologyFood scienceFood groupNutrientMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A main characteristic of children perceived as picky eaters is their tendency to avoid certain foods or food groups. The goal of this narrative review is to provide an overview of published studies that have examined whether picky eating in childhood is in fact associated with measurable differences in food and/or nutrient intakes and growth. While picky eaters appear to consume less vegetables compared to non-picky eaters, no consistent differences were observed for the intakes of other food groups or the intakes of energy, macronutrients and dietary fiber. Although, in some studies, picky eaters had lower intakes of certain vitamins and minerals, the levels consumed generally exceeded the recommended values, suggesting nutritional requirements are being met. No consistent relationship between childhood picky eating and growth status was observed, although significant differences in body weight/growth between picky and non-picky eaters were most discernible in studies where multiple defining criteria were used to identify picky eating. The research area would benefit from the adoption of a uniform definition of picky eating. More longitudinal assessments are also required to understand the long-term impact of picky eating on nutritional status and growth.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations84
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207