The Association between Early Childhood and Later Childhood Sugar-Containing Beverage Intake: A Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sugar-containing beverages (SCBs) are a major source of sugar intake in children. Early life intake of SCBs may be a strong predictor of SCB intake later in life. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate if SCB intake (defined as 100% fruit juice, soda, and sweetened drinks) in early childhood (≤2.5 years of age) was associated with SCB intake in later childhood (5–9 years of age). A prospective cohort study was conducted using data from the TARGet Kids! primary care practice network (n = 999). Typical daily SCB intake was measured by parent-completed questionnaires. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using logistic regression. A total of 43% of children consumed ≥0.5 cups/day of SCBs at ≤2.5 years and this increased to 64% by 5–9 years. Daily SCB intake, compared to no daily intake, at ≤2.5 years was significantly associated with SCB intake at 5–9 years (adjusted OR: 4.03; 95% CI: 2.92–5.55) and this association was much stronger for soda/sweetened drinks (adjusted OR: 12.83; 95% CI: 4.98, 33.0) than 100% fruit juice (OR: 3.61; 95% CI: 2.63–4.95). Other early life risk factors for SCB intake at 5–9 years were presence of older siblings, low household income, and shorter breastfeeding duration. Daily intake of SCBs in early childhood was strongly associated with greater SCB intake in later childhood. Early life may be an important period to target for population prevention strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".