Promotion of Family Routines and Positive Parent-Child Interactions for Obesity Prevention: Protocol for the 3 Pillars Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood obesity is a challenging public health issue, with 30% of children aged 2 to 4 years classified as being overweight or obese in New Zealand. This is concerning, given that up to 90% of obese 3-year-old children are overweight or obese by the time they reach adolescence. Interventions that target this age range often fail to demonstrate long-term effectiveness and primarily focus on traditional weight-related behaviors, including diet and physical activity. However, research suggests that targeting nontraditional weight-related behaviors, such as sleep, screen time, and family meals, may be a more effective approach in this age group, given the immense challenges in changing traditional weight-related behaviors in the long term. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the proposed study was to develop and pilot the 3 Pillars Study (3PS), a 6-week program for parents of New Zealand toddlers and preschoolers aged 2 to 4 years to promote positive parent-child interactions during 3 family routines, specifically adequate sleep, regular family meals, and restricted screen time. METHODS: Screen time at the end of the 6-week program is the primary endpoint. The effects of the program on screen time, frequency of family meals, parent feeding practices, diet quality, and sleep duration will be piloted using a randomized controlled trial, with outcomes compared between the active intervention group and a wait-list control group at 6 weeks (at the end of the program) and 12 weeks (at final follow-up). We aim to recruit 50 participants (25 per arm). Eligibility criteria include parents of children aged 2 to 4 years who are currently exceeding screen use recommendations (ie, greater than 1 hour of screen time per day). The 3PS program involves a half-day workshop, run by a community worker trained to deliver the program content, and 6-week access to a study website that contains in-depth information about the program. All participants will also receive a study pack, which includes resources to encourage engagement in the 3 family routines promoted by the program. Study data will be collected in REDCap. All statistical analyses will be performed using SAS version 9.4 and have been specified a priori in a statistical analysis plan prepared by the study statistician. RESULTS: Trial recruitment opened in July 2018. Final follow-up was completed in December 2018, with trial findings expected to be available in early 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this pilot study will provide relevant data to inform the design of a larger effectiveness study of the 3PS program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12618000823279; https://www.anzctr.org. au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=375004 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/773CALeTK). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12792.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.011 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".