| Literature DB >> 35684111 |
Kenny Mendoza-Herrera1, Rafael Monge-Rojas2, June O'Neill1, Vanessa Smith-Castro3, Josiemer Mattei1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whereas parental feeding styles (PFS) influence children's diet, less is known about this relationship in adolescents.Entities:
Keywords: Costa Rica; adolescents; diet; excess weight; mediation; parental feeding styles
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35684111 PMCID: PMC9182736 DOI: 10.3390/nu14112314
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 6.706
Figure 1Conceptual model depicting the proposed associations between parental feeding styles (PFS) scores and adolescents’ weight status measured as body mass index (BMI) indirectly through the Traditional Costa Rica Adolescents Diet Score (TCRAD). Colors in the figure were assigned to reflect the hypothesized directionality of the proposed associations: green reflects an inverse association between PFS scores and BMI, whereas red reflects a positive association between PFS scores and BMI.
Sociodemographic characteristics of Costa Rican adolescents stratified by excess weight categories.
| Total | Healthy Weight | Excess Weight | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | % |
| % |
| % |
| |
|
| 686 | 67.1 | 460 | 32.9 | 226 | ||
|
| |||||||
| Boys | 35.4 | 243 | 67.1 | 163 | 32.9 | 80 | |
| Girls | 64.6 | 443 | 67.0 | 297 | 33.0 | 146 | 0.99 |
|
| |||||||
| 13–14 years | 40.2 | 276 | 65.6 | 181 | 34.4 | 95 | |
| 15–16 years | 36.6 | 251 | 66.5 | 167 | 33.5 | 84 | |
| 17–18 years | 36.6 | 159 | 70.4 | 112 | 29.6 | 47 | 0.57 |
|
| |||||||
| Urban | 48.0 | 329 | 67.5 | 222 | 32.5 | 107 | |
| Rural | 52.0 | 357 | 66.7 | 238 | 33.3 | 119 | 0.82 |
|
| |||||||
| Low | 32.9 | 226 | 71.2 | 161 | 28.8 | 65 | |
| Middle | 41.0 | 281 | 63.7 | 179 | 36.3 | 102 | |
| High | 26.1 | 179 | 67.0 | 120 | 33.0 | 59 | 0.20 |
1 χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test (contingency tables for more than 2 categories or proportion comparison). Abbreviations: SES, socioeconomic status.
Parental feeding styles, diet quality, and anthropometric indicators in Costa Rican adolescents stratified by excess weight categories (n = 686).
| Variables | Total | Healthy Weight | Excess Weight | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| |||||||
| Verbal encouragement of healthy eating | 2.0 | 0.8 | 2.1 | 0.8 | 1.9 | 0.7 | 0.009 |
| Scolding (indirect control) 1 | 2.4 | 0.9 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 2.3 | 0.9 | 0.010 |
| Direct control 2 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 0.8 | 0.15 |
| Instrumental/emotional 3 | 2.3 | 0.7 | 2.4 | 0.8 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 0.009 |
|
| 7.2 | 1.9 | 7.2 | 1.9 | 7.1 | 1.8 | 0.87 |
|
| |||||||
| Legumes | 43.6 | 47.2 | 46.7 | 50.3 | 37.2 | 39.7 | 0.007 |
| Vegetables | 56.5 | 67.5 | 56.1 | 68.0 | 57.4 | 66.7 | 0.81 |
| Fruits | 81.2 | 101.9 | 84.1 | 105.8 | 75.3 | 93.6 | 0.27 |
| Vegetable oils | 6.7 | 4.1 | 6.9 | 4.2 | 6.3 | 3.8 | 0.08 |
| Dairy | 112.0 | 151.6 | 105.5 | 147.4 | 125.2 | 159.1 | 0.11 |
| Tortillas | 6.1 | 14.2 | 6.0 | 12.7 | 6.5 | 16.8 | 0.69 |
|
| |||||||
| White rice | 142.2 | 104.2 | 151.8 | 109.6 | 122.7 | 89.4 | <0.001 |
| Red/processed meat | 39.7 | 41.8 | 40.2 | 43.0 | 38.7 | 39.2 | 0.67 |
| Solid Fats | 10.2 | 23.2 | 9.5 | 22.3 | 11.7 | 24.9 | 0.24 |
| Desserts | 44.7 | 50.8 | 45.0 | 45.0 | 44.0 | 61.0 | 0.83 |
| Sugary drinks | 298.8 | 295.5 | 294.3 | 279.2 | 307.8 | 326.7 | 0.59 |
| Snacks | 14.5 | 19.0 | 14.3 | 19.0 | 15.0 | 19.0 | 0.63 |
| Fast food | 38.1 | 63.2 | 38.3 | 64.6 | 37.7 | 60.5 | 0.89 |
| Refined bread | 49.5 | 38.4 | 50.9 | 39.2 | 46.8 | 36.8 | 0.19 |
| Body weight (kg) | 57.1 | 13.2 | 51.0 | 7.9 | 69.6 | 13.0 | <0.001 |
| Height (cm) | 159.5 | 8.4 | 159.2 | 8.4 | 160.0 | 8.3 | 0.96 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 22.3 | 4.3 | 20.0 | 2.1 | 27.1 | 3.7 | <0.001 |
1 Verbal sanctions/scolding—indirect control of healthy food intake. 2 Direct control of access to and intake of food. 3 Use of food to regulate emotions and behavior. 4 Student t-test. Abbreviations: TCRAD, Traditional Costa Rican Adolescents’ Diet; PFS, Parental feeding styles; g, grams; kg, kilograms; cm, centimeters; m, meters; SD, standard deviation.
Mediation of TCRAD score in the association between PFS scores and the odds of excess weight in Costa Rican adolescents (n = 686).
| Verbal Encouragement of Healthy Eating | Scolding (Indirect Control) | Direct Control | Instrumental/Emotional | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effects | OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| ||||
| NDE 1,2 | 0.79 | 0.50 | 1.25 | 0.32 | 0.81 | 0.55 | 1.18 | 0.27 | 1.52 | 1.02 | 2.27 | 0.039 | 0.68 | 0.42 | 1.13 | 0.14 |
| NIE 1,3 | 0.94 | 0.87 | 1.00 | 0.06 | 1.05 | 0.98 | 1.12 | 0.17 | 1.02 | 0.98 | 1.06 | 0.43 | 1.05 | 0.99 | 1.12 | 0.12 |
| TE 1,4 | 0.74 | 0.47 | 1.17 | 0.20 | 0.85 | 0.57 | 1.25 | 0.40 | 1.55 | 1.04 | 2.31 | 0.033 | 0.72 | 0.44 | 1.19 | 0.20 |
| PM | 0.20 | −0.25 | 0.04 | −0.12 | ||||||||||||
1 We obtained natural direct effect (NDE), natural indirect effect (NIE), total effect (TE), and proportion mediated (PM) through the methods proposed by Valeri and VanderWeele [63]. 2 PFS scores → excess weight. 3 PFS scores → excess weight mediated by TCRAD scores. 4 PFS scores → TCRAD → excess weight. Abbreviations: TCRAD, Traditional Costa Rican Adolescents’ Diet; PFS, Parental feeding style; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Mediation of TCRAD scores in the association between PFS scores and the odds of excess weight stratified by sex in Costa Rican adolescents (n = 686).
| Girls ( | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Verbal Encouragement of Healthy Eating | Scolding (Indirect Control) | Direct Control | Instrumental/Emotional | |||||||||||||
| Effects | OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| OR | 95% CI |
| ||||
| NDE 1,2 | 0.80 | 0.46 | 1.40 | 0.44 | 0.74 | 0.48 | 1.14 | 0.17 | 1.40 | 0.86 | 2.29 | 0.18 | 0.87 | 0.47 | 1.62 | 0.66 |
| NIE 1,3 | 0.96 | 0.90 | 1.03 | 0.27 | 1.04 | 0.96 | 1.14 | 0.33 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 1.03 | 0.87 | 1.02 | 0.97 | 1.08 | 0.39 |
| TE 1,4 | 0.77 | 0.44 | 1.35 | 0.37 | 0.77 | 0.50 | 1.19 | 0.24 | 1.41 | 0.86 | 2.29 | 0.17 | 0.89 | 0.48 | 1.66 | 0.71 |
| PM | 0.13 | −0.14 | 0.01 | −0.18 | ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| NDE 1,2 | 0.62 | 0.28 | 1.42 | 0.26 | 1.08 | 0.61 | 1.93 | 0.79 | 2.10 | 1.03 | 4.31 | 0.042 | 0.43 | 0.18 | 1.02 | 0.06 |
| NIE 1,3 | 0.93 | 0.76 | 1.13 | 0.46 | 1.01 | 0.97 | 1.04 | 0.73 | 1.01 | 0.97 | 1.06 | 0.58 | 1.04 | 0.94 | 1.15 | 0.49 |
| TE 1,4 | 0.58 | 0.26 | 1.29 | 0.18 | 1.09 | 0.61 | 1.95 | 0.77 | 2.13 | 1.04 | 4.38 | 0.039 | 0.44 | 0.19 | 1.05 | 0.06 |
| PM | 0.11 | 0.07 | 0.03 | −0.03 | ||||||||||||
1 We obtained natural direct effect (NDE), natural indirect effect (NIE), total effect (TE), and proportion mediated (PM) through the methods proposed by Valeri and VanderWeele [63]. 2 PFS scores → excess weight. 3 PFS scores → excess weight mediated by TCRAD scores. 4 PFS scores → TCRAD → excess weight. Abbreviations: TCRAD, Traditional Costa Rican Adolescents’ Diet; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.