MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410435672 · doi:10.2196/73276

Examining the Longitudinal Impact of Within- and Between-Day Fluctuations in Food Parenting Practices on Child Dietary Intake: Protocol for a Longitudinal Cohort Study Within a Sample of Preschooler-Parent Dyads

2025· article· en· W4410435672 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katie A. Loth, Julian Wolfson, Martha Barnard, Natalie Hogan, Tasso Brandt, Jayne A. Fulkerson, Jennifer O. Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Longitudinal studyDevelopmental psychologyCohortEarly childhoodChild rearingCohort studyEnvironmental healthMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A healthful diet in early childhood is essential for healthy growth and disease prevention. Parents influence children's diets through supportive (eg, structure and autonomy support) and unsupportive (eg, coercive control and indulgence) food parenting practices. Historically, much of this work has focused on parents' "usual" feeding behaviors using survey methods. However, recent studies using ecological momentary assessment methods have allowed assessment of food parenting behaviors in "real time." This work has revealed that the practices used by parents to feed children vary across contexts and are influenced by factors such as stress or time constraints. Research is needed to understand the dynamic nature of food parenting and its impact on children's diets. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the methods and procedures used in the Preschool Plates cohort study, which aimed to (1) describe within- and between-day fluctuations in food parenting practices across time and context, (2) examine the longitudinal impact of within- and between-day fluctuations in food parenting practices on child dietary intake, and (3) identify momentary predictors of within- and between-day fluctuations in food parenting practices across time and context. METHODS: Preschool Plates is a longitudinal cohort study examining the impact of food parenting practices on the dietary intake of 3- to 5-year-old children. A total of 273 parent-preschooler dyads consented and enrolled, and 254 (93%) dyads completed baseline data collection. Dyads will be followed for 2 years using state-of-the-art measures, including an 8-day ecological momentary assessment protocol to assess food parenting, contemporary measures of food parenting, and 3 interview-led 24-hour dietary recalls, collected at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Child height and weight will be measured at 3 time points. RESULTS: Recruitment for our baseline sample (N=254) occurred between October 2023 and September 2024. Participants will complete follow-up data collection after 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. A racially and ethnically diverse cohort was enrolled, with 28.3% (72/254) of enrolled participants identifying as White and 71.7% (182/254) identifying as non-White. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the proposed study will inform the development of anticipatory guidance for feeding young children and randomized controlled trials designed to intervene on parents' responses to momentary factors to encourage interactions with children around feeding that promote optimal diet quality. For example, findings could inform the development of an ecological momentary (ie, real time) intervention that delivers content to participants' mobile devices in response to real-time assessments of context and circumstance. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/73276.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.335
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet→French-language works237,207→