| Literature DB >> 35457306 |
Meijing An1, Xiyao Liu1, Hao Guo2, Qianling Zhou1.
Abstract
High consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF) increases the risks of non-communicable diseases and all-cause mortality in adulthood, and the risk of early childhood caries. Limited evidence about factors influencing children's consumption of UPF exists. This study was conducted to assess the prevalence of UPF consumption among children less than three years of age, and identify its associations with caregivers' emotional and instrumental feeding, and children's emotional eating. A cross-sectional study was conducted in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China. Caregivers caring for children aged 6-36 months (n = 408) were recruited. Caregivers' emotional and instrumental feeding practices and children's emotional eating were assessed by the Parents' Feeding Practices Scale for Infant and Young Child and Children's Eating Behaviour Questionnaire, respectively. Children's UPF consumption was assessed by a validated Food Frequency Questionnaire. Of the children, 86.8% consumed UPF. The highest percentage of UPF consumed was pastries (63.5%), followed by solid or semi-solid dairy products (58.8%), and reconstituted meat products (56.4%). Caregivers' emotional and instrumental feeding was positively associated with children's consumption of UPF (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 1.01, 2.49), a higher frequency of UPF consumption weekly (OR = 1.80, 95%CI: 1.35, 2.39), and a larger amount of UPF consumption weekly (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.38, 2.49). Children's higher frequency of emotional undereating was associated with their UPF consumption (OR = 1.61, 95%CI: 1.07, 2.42) and a higher frequency of UPF consumption weekly (OR = 1.33, 95%CI: 1.03, 1.73). Children's emotional undereating significantly mediated the associations between caregivers' emotional and instrumental feeding and children's consumption of reconstituted meat products. Caregivers should be educated to avoid emotional and instrumental feeding practices, and cultivate children's good eating habits to improve children's diet quality.Entities:
Keywords: emotional eating; emotional feeding; infants and toddlers; instrumental feeding; ultra-processed foods
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35457306 PMCID: PMC9028148 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19084439
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Flowchart of the participants.
Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants, caregivers’ feeding practices, and children’s emotional eating behaviours (n = 408).
| Characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Caregiver’s relationship with the child | |
| Parent | 309 (75.7) |
| Nonparent | 99 (24.3) |
| Caregiver’s education level | |
| Senior middle school or below | 281 (68.9) |
| College or above | 127 (31.1) |
| Caregiver’s employment status | |
| Unemployed | 216 (52.9) |
| Employed | 192 (47.1) |
| Caregiver’s weight status † | |
| Underweight | 18 (4.5) |
| Normal | 206 (51.7) |
| Overweight | 116 (29.0) |
| Obesity | 59 (14.8) |
| Monthly household income | |
| ≤5000 CNY | 161 (39.5) |
| >5000 CNY | 247 (60.5) |
| Child’s age | |
| 6–24 months | 191 (46.8) |
| 25–36 months | 217 (53.2) |
| Child’s gender | |
| Boy | 213 (52.2) |
| Girl | 195 (47.8) |
| Timing of complementary feeding † | |
| <6 months | 62 (15.2) |
| 6–8 months | 332 (81.4) |
| >8 months | 13 (3.2) |
| Caregivers’ emotional and instrumental feeding ‡ | 2.7 (0.8) |
| Children’s emotional overeating ‡ | 2.1 (0.6) |
| Children’s emotional undereating ‡ | 2.9 (0.8) |
† Variable with missing values. ‡ Assessed by a 5-point Likert scale, ranged from 1 to 5. A higher score indicated a higher frequency of the practice.
Children’s consumption of UPF (n = 408).
| UPF Items | Percentage of Consumption | Times of Consumption in a Week | Amount of Consumption in a Week (in g) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (IQR) | ≥Median | Median (IQR) | ≥Median | ||
| UPF | 354 (86.8) | 9 (4–14) | 210 (51.5) | 365.0 (62.0–813.8) | 204 (50.0) |
| Sugar-sweetened beverages | 82 (20.1) | 0 (0–0) | - | 0.0 (0.0–0.0) | - |
| Solid or semi-solid dairy products | 240 (58.8) | 1 (0–5) | - | 100.0 (0.0–500.0) | 220 (53.9) |
| Pastries | 259 (63.5) | 2 (0–5) | 217 (53.2) | 30.0 (0.0–136.3) | 205 (50.2) |
| Savoury packaged snacks | 146 (35.8) | 0 (0–2) | - | 0.0 (0.0–40.0) | - |
| Confectioneries | 156 (38.2) | 0 (0–2) | - | 0.0 (0.0–20.0) | - |
| Reconstituted meat products | 230 (56.4) | 1 (0–3) | - | 19.0 (0.0–70.0) | 204 (50.0) |
UPF: ultra-processed foods; IQR: interquartile range. The estimated density of sugar-sweetened beverages is 1 g/mL. -: Not categorised.
Figure 2The consumption of UPF by children aged 6–24 months (n = 191) and children aged 25–36 months (n = 217). UPF: ultra-processed foods. The percentages of consumption of UPF, as well as each UPF item, were different between children aged 6–24 months and children aged 25–36 months (p < 0.05).
The associations between children’s UPF consumption and caregivers’ emotional and instrumental feeding, as well as children’s emotional eating (n = 408).
| Variables | UPF a | Sugar-Sweetened Beverages b | Solid or Semi-Solid Dairy Products c | Pastries d |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emotional and instrumental feeding | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.37 (0.95,1.98) | 1.68 (1.20,2.36) ** | 1.54 (1.18,2.00) ** | 1.37 (1.06,1.79) * |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.59 (1.01,2.49) * | 1.64 (1.17,2.31) ** | 1.61 (1.21,2.16) ** | 1.49 (1.12,1.99) ** |
| Emotional overeating | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 0.90 (0.58,1.40) | 1.05 (0.72,1.53) | 0.88 (0.65,1.19) | 1.08 (0.79,1.48) |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.25 (0.76,2.04) | 1.10 (0.74,1.63) | 1.04 (0.75,1.46) | 1.29 (0.92,1.81) |
| Emotional undereating | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.45 (1.03,2.04) * | 1.26 (0.92,1.70) | 1.21 (0.95,1.54) | 1.19 (0.93,1.52) |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.61 (1.07,2.42) * | 1.24 (0.91,1.69) | 1.25 (0.97,1.63) | 1.20 (0.93,1.55) |
|
|
|
| ||
| Emotional and instrumental feeding | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.60 (1.21,2.11) ** | 1.27 (0.98,1.66) | 1.22 (0.95,1.58) | |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.58 (1.20,2.09) ** | 1.28 (0.96,1.70) | 1.31 (0.99,1.74) | |
| Emotional overeating | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.12 (0.82,1.53) | 0.89 (0.65,1.21) | 1.04 (0.77,1.40) | |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.20 (0.87,1.66) | 1.12 (0.79,1.59) | 1.28 (0.91,1.79) | |
| Emotional undereating | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.12 (0.87,1.43) | 1.14 (0.89,1.46) | 1.40 (1.10,1.79) ** | |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.12 (0.87,1.43) | 1.15 (0.88,1.51) | 1.46 (1.12,1.90) ** |
UPF: ultra-processed foods; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval. a In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, caregiver’s employment status, and monthly household income were controlled as potential confounders. b In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s weight status, and monthly household income were controlled as potential confounders. c In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, timing of complementary feeding, caregiver’s relationship with the child, and monthly household income were controlled as potential confounders. d In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, child’s gender, timing of complementary feeding, caregiver’s relationship with the child, and monthly household income were controlled as potential confounders. e In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age was controlled as the potential confounder. f In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age and caregiver’s weight status were controlled as potential confounders. g In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, caregiver’s education level, employment status, and weight status were controlled as potential confounders. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
The associations between children’s frequencies of UPF consumption and caregivers’ emotional and instrumental feeding, as well as children’s emotional eating (n = 408).
| Variables | UPF (≥9 times/week) a | Pastries (≥2 times/week) b |
|---|---|---|
| Emotional and instrumental feeding | ||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.71 (1.31,2.23) *** | 1.29 (1.00,1.67) * |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.80 (1.35,2.39) *** | 1.36 (1.03,1.78) * |
| Emotional overeating | ||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.05 (0.78,1.41) | 1.04 (0.77,1.40) |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.30 (0.93,1.81) | 1.20 (0.87,1.65) |
| Emotional undereating | ||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.29 (1.02,1.64) * | 1.03 (0.81,1.31) |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.33 (1.03,1.73) * | 1.04 (0.81,1.33) |
UPF: ultra-processed foods; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval. a In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver employment status, weight status, and monthly household income were controlled for as potential confounders. b In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, gender, caregiver relationship with the child, weight status, and household monthly income were controlled for as potential confounders. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
The associations between children’s amount of UPF consumption and caregivers’ emotional and instrumental feeding, as well as children’s emotional eating (n = 408).
| Variables | UPF (≥365 g/week) a | Solid or Semi-Solid Dairy Products (≥100 g/week) b | Pastries (≥30 g/week) c | Reconstituted Meat Products (≥19 g/week) d |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emotional and instrumental feeding | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.70 (1.30,2.21) *** | 1.50 (1.16,1.95) ** | 1.47 (1.14,1.91) ** | 1.30 (1.01,1.68) |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.85 (1.38,2.49) *** | 1.55 (1.16,2.07) ** | 1.54 (1.16,2.02) ** | 1.38 (1.04,1.81) * |
| Emotional overeating | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 0.77 (0.57,1.05) | 0.89 (0.66,1.20) | 0.92 (0.68,1.25) | 0.98 (0.72,1.32) |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 0.90 (0.64,1.26) | 1.06 (0.76,1.48) | 1.11 (0.80,1.53) | 1.17 (0.84,1.63) |
| Emotional undereating | ||||
| Crude OR (95%CI) | 1.20 (0.94,1.52) | 1.19 (0.94,1.51) | 1.08 (0.85,1.37) | 1.35 (1.06,1.72) * |
| Adjusted OR (95%CI) | 1.25 (0.96,1.63) | 1.23 (0.95,1.59) | 1.07 (0.84,1.38) | 1.37 (1.06,1.78) * |
UPF: ultra-processed foods; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval. a In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, education level, and employment status were controlled as potential confounders. b In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, and monthly household income were controlled as potential confounders. c In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, and weight status were controlled as potential confounders. d In the adjusted model (presented by adjusted OR), child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, education level, employment status, and weight status were controlled as potential confounders. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
The mediation effect of children’s emotional undereating on the associations between caregivers’ emotional and instrumental feeding and children’s consumption of reconstituted meat products (n = 408).
| Path | Indirect Effect Estimate | BootstrappingBias Corrected 95%CI |
|---|---|---|
| Emotional and instrumental feeding → Emotional undereating → Reconstituted meat products a | 0.026 * | 0.005, 0.050 |
| Emotional and instrumental feeding → Emotional undereating → Reconstituted meat products (≥19 g/week) b | 0.020 | −0.002, 0.040 |
The calculation of indirect effect estimate used the mediation package in R, and is based on the mediator model and outcome model. In the mediator model, a linear regression model was conducted with emotional undereating as outcome variable, and emotional and instrumental feeding as independent variable. In the outcome model, a logistic regression model was conducted with the consumption of reconstituted meat products as outcome variable, and emotional and instrumental feeding, and emotional undereating as independent variables. CI: confidence interval. a child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, caregiver’s education level, employment status, and weight status were adjusted in both the mediator and outcome models. b child’s age, caregiver’s relationship with the child, caregiver’s education level, employment status, and weight status were adjusted in both the mediator and outcome models. * p < 0.05.