Strong Families Start at Home/Familias Fuertes Comienzan en Casa—Improving Child Diet Quality and Parental Feeding Practices: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children in the United States have poor diet quality, increasing their risk for chronic disease burden later in life. Caregivers' feeding behaviors are a critical factor in shaping lifelong dietary habits. The Strong Families Start at Home/Familias Fuertes Comienzan en Casa (SFSH) was a 6-month, home-based, pilot randomized-controlled feasibility trial that aimed to improve the diet quality of 2-5-year-old children and promote positive parental feeding practices among a predominantly Hispanic/Latine sample. The pilot saw significant improvements in children's Healthy Eating Index-2015 total and whole fruit scores, as well as multiple food parenting practices, and it was received well by participants. OBJECTIVE: Building on the success of the pilot study, this protocol paper describes the modifications, study design, and procedures for a fully powered randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Caregiver-child dyads are randomized to a "healthy eating" intervention group or a "reading readiness" attention control group. In the intervention group, a trained community health worker conducts monthly home visits or phone calls for 6 months that focus on age-appropriate nutrition recommendations and food parenting practices. There are three home visits that include tailored nutrition education materials that address their child's appetitive traits and eating habits, an interactive cooking activity, and a review of a family meal video with feedback. Community health workers use motivational interviewing and goal setting, which are key components of the program. The control group is similarly structured, with content focusing on reading and language development. Caregivers complete in-person and over-the-phone baseline and 6-month follow-up measurements to capture diet quality (primary outcomes: Healthy Eating Index-2015 scores via two 24-h dietary recalls and dermal carotenoids) and selected parental feeding practices and availability of healthy foods in the home (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: This protocol was approved by the Brown University institutional review board (protocol number 2022003389). As of March 2025, a total of 81 participants were randomized. Of these, 29 participants completed the study, and 8 participants withdrew. Recruitment will continue until 257 participants have been randomized. Data analysis is expected to conclude in 2028. CONCLUSIONS: Findings will determine the efficacy of the intervention to improve child diet quality and parental feeding practices, which will ultimately inform future effectiveness and the real-world of home-based food parenting programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06099288; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06099288. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/73923.
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 | 0.050 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.098 | 0.015 |
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".