academy of nutrition and dietetics
  • Home
  • Projects
    • Adult Weight Management Guideline
    • Advanced Technology in Food Production
    • Athletic Performance
    • Bariatric Surgery
    • Breastfeeding
    • Celiac Disease Guideline
    • Chronic Kidney Disease Guideline
    • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Guideline
    • Critical Illness Guideline
    • Cystic Fibrosis Guideline
    • Diabetes Type 1 (Pediatrics)
    • Diabetes Types1 and 2 Guideline
    • Diabetes Type 2 Prevention Guideline
    • Dietary Approaches and Health Outcomes
    • Dietary Fatty Acids
    • Disorders of Lipid Metabolism Guideline
    • Energy Expenditure Guideline
    • Fiber
    • Fluoride
    • Food and Nutrition for Older Adults Guideline
    • Fruit Juice
    • Gestational Diabetes Guideline
    • Health Disparities
    • Heart Failure Guideline
    • HIV/AIDS Guideline
    • Hydration
    • Hypertension Guideline
    • Malnutrition in Older Adults
    • Malnutrition in Pregnancy
    • Medical Nutrition Therapy
    • Microwave and Home Food Safety
    • Nutrient Supplementation
    • Nutrition Counseling
    • Nutrition Guidance in Healthy Children
    • Nutrition Screening Adults
    • Nutrition Screening Pediatrics
    • Nutritional Genomics
    • Nutritive and Non-Nutritive Sweetener
    • Obesity, Reproduction and Pregnancy
    • Oncology Guideline
    • Pediatric Weight Management Guideline
    • Preterm Infant (VLBW) Enteral Nutrition Guideline
    • Physical Activity and Nutrition
    • Retail Nutrition
    • Single Serving Portion Sized Meals and Weight Management
    • Sodium
    • Spinal Cord Injury Guideline
    • Telenutrition
    • Transgender Nutrition
    • Umami
    • Unintended Weight Loss in Older Adults Guideline
    • Vegetarian Nutrition Guideline
    • Wound Care
    • Collaborative Guidelines and Joint Position-Consensus Statements
    image description
    Evidence Analysis Library Proven Research When It Matters Most Sign In
    Essential Evidence For continued Success.
  • Policy and Process
    • Overview
    • Evidence-Based Practice
    • EAL Systematic Review Process
    • EAL Guideline Development Process
    • EAL Policies and Procedures
    • Evidence Analysis Manual
  • Resources
    • Resources
    • EAC Orientation Tutorial
    • Presentations
    • Nutrition Care Process
    • Research Gaps
    • Shop EAL Products
  • Index
  • About
    • About the EAL
    • Citing Content from the EAL
    • Permission to Reprint Content from the EAL
    • FAQs
    • Join the EAL Team - Volunteer
  • Risk ScreenMood Disorders
  • ResourcesMood Disorders
  • Login
  • Not A Member?
  • Contact us
  • Help
Home
  • Pediatric Weight Management
  • ARCHIVE: Childhood Overweight (PWM) Systematic Review (2005-2007)
  • PWM: Factors Associated with Pediatric Overweight (2006)

  • Increase Font Size
  • Decrease Font Size
  • View as PDF
  • Grade Chart
  • Pediatric Weight Management (PWM): A Scoping Review (2020)
  • Pediatric Weight Management (PWM) Guideline (2015)
    • PWM: Executive Summary of Recommendations (2015)
    • PWM: Introduction (2015)
      • PWM: Introduction (2015)
      • PWM: Scope of Guideline (2015)
      • PWM: Statement of Intent (2015)
      • PWM: Guideline Methods (2015)
      • PWM: Specific Topic Search Methods (2015)
      • PWM: Implementation of the Guideline (2015)
      • PWM: Benefits and Risks/Harms of Implementation (2015)
    • PWM: Major Recommendations (2015)
    • PWM: Background Information (2015)
    • PWM: References (2015)
  • Pediatric Weight Management (PWM) Systematic Review (2015)
    • PWM: Multicomponent Interventions (2015)
    • PWM: Treatment Context (2015)
  • Pediatric Overweight (PWM) Systematic Review (2011-2012)
    • PWM: Environment (2012)
    • PWM: School-based Interventions (2011)
  • Pediatric Weight Management (PWM) Guideline (2007)
    • PWM: Executive Summary of Recommendations (2007)
    • PWM: Introduction (2007)
      • PWM: Introduction (2007)
      • PWM: Scope of Guideline (2007)
      • PWM: Statement of Intent (2007)
      • PWM: Guideline Methods (2007)
      • PWM: Specific Topic Search Methods (2007)
      • PWM: Implementation of the Guideline (2007)
      • PWM: Benefits and Risks/Harms of Implementation (2007)
    • PWM: Major Recommendations (2007)
    • PWM: Appendices (2007)
      • PWM: Treatment Assessment (2007)
    • PWM: Background Information (2007)
    • PWM: References (2007)

  • Assessment
    In general, what is the relationship between parental feeding strategies and childhood obesity?
    • Conclusion

      There are a number of feeding strategies that could potentially increase the risk of childhood obesity, however there is limited evidence supporting any consistent associations.

    • Grade: III
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: In general, what is the relationship between parental feeding strategies and childhood obesity?
      • Detail
    Are parental attitudes towards their own dietary intakes (Dietary restraint & disinhibition) associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      Parental dietary disinhibition and restraint may be related to a higher risk of overweight in children. Parents are likely to exert control over their children’s behavior in areas that are important and potentially problematic for themselves; however these studies have only been conducted among predominantly white, middle-class populations and therefore these results may not be applicable to other populations.

    • Grade: III
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Parental Attitudes towards Their Own Dietary Intakes and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Cutting TM, Fisher JO, Grimm-Thomas K, Birch LL. Like mother, like daughter: Familial patterns of overweight are mediated by mothers’ dietary disinhibition. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 69: 608-613.
        • Davison KK, Birch LL. Obesigenic families: Parents’ physical activity and dietary intake patterns predict girls’ risk of overweight. Int'l J Obes. 2002; 26: 1,186-1,193.
        • Fisher JO, Birch LL. Restricting access to palatable foods affects children’s behavioral response, food selection and intake. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 69: 1,264-1,272.
        • Hood MY, Moore LL, Sundarajan-Ramamurti A, Singer M, Cupples LA, Ellison RC. Parental eating attitudes and the development of obesity in children. The Framingham Children’s Study. Int J Obes 2000; 24: 1,319-1,325.
        • Johnson SL, Birch LL. Parents’ and children’s adiposity and eating style. Pediatrics 1994; 94: 653-661.
      • Related Topics
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Parent Attitudes Toward their own Weight and Child Overweight 2004
       
    Is family functioning associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      Positive aspects of family functioning such as family cohesion, expressiveness, democratic style, parental support and cognitive stimulation at home may be protective against childhood overweight, while other negative aspects of family functioning such as lack of parental support or over-possessiveness may be associated with overweight in children. At present, however, it is challenging to compare studies because of different constructs used to assess family functioning.

    • Grade: III
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Family Functioning and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Lissau I, Sorensen TIA. Parental neglect during childhood and increased risk of obesity in young adulthood. Lancet 1994; 343: 324-328.
        • Lissau I, Breum L, Sorensen TIA. Maternal attitude to sweet eating habits and risk of overweight in offspring: a ten-year prospective population study. Int J Obes 1993; 17: 125-129.
        • Mendelson BK, White DR, Schliecker E. Adolescents’ weight, sex and family functioning. Int J Eat Disord 1995; 17: 73-79.
        • Strauss RS, Knight J. Influence of the home environment on the development of obesity in children.
          Pediatrics. 1999 Jun;103(6):e85.  
        • Trombini E, Baldaro B, Bertaccini R, Mattei C, Montebarocci O, Rossi N. Maternal attitudes and attachment styles in mothers of obese children. Percept Mot Skills. 2003 Oct;97(2):613-20.
        • Valtolina GG, Marta E. Family relations and psychosocial risk in families with an obese adolescent. Psychological Reports 1998; 83: 251-260.
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Family Functioning 2004
       
    Is parental concern about or criticism of their child's weight status associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      Parental concern about child’s weight status may be associated with overweight in children; however a majority of the research has been conducted among non-Hispanic, white girls and may be applicable only to this population.

    • Grade: II
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Parental Concern about or Criticism of Child's Weight Status and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Agras WS, Hammer LD, McNicholas F, Kraemer HC. Risk factors for childhood overweight: a prospective study from birth to 9.5 years. J Pediatr. 2004 Jul;145(1):20-5.
        • Birch LL, Fisher JO, Davison KK. Learning to overeat: maternal use of restrictive feeding practices promotes girls' eating in the absence of hunger. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Aug;78(2):215-20.
        • Brewis A. Biocultural aspects of obesity in young Mexican schoolchildren. Am J Hum Biol. 2003 May-Jun;15(3):446-60.
        • Davison KK, Birch LL. Weight status, parent reaction, and self-concept in five-year-old girls. Pediatrics 2001; 107: 46-53.
        • Davison KK, Birch LL. Processes linking weight status and self-concept among girls from ages 5 to 7 years. Developmental Psychology. 2002; 38: 735-748.
        • Kelishadi R, Pour MH, Sarraf-Zadegan N, Sadry GH, Ansari R, Alikhassy H, Bashardoust N. Obesity and associated modifiable environmental factors in Iranian adolescents: Isfahan Healthy Heart Program - Heart Health Promotion from Childhood. Pediatr Int. 2003 Aug;45(4):435-42.
        • Spruijt-Metz D, Lindquist CH, et.al. Relation between mothers’ child-feeding practices and children’s adiposity. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;75:581-586.
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Parental Concern 2004
       
    Is parental control over child dietary intake associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      The parental child-feeding practice/feeding style, parental control over child’s dietary intake, does not appear to be associated with overweight in children.

    • Grade: II
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Parental Control Over Child's Dietary Intake and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Agras WS, Hammer LD, McNicholas F, Kraemer HC. Risk factors for childhood overweight: a prospective study from birth to 9.5 years. J Pediatr. 2004 Jul;145(1):20-5.
        • Baughcum AE, Powers SW, Johnson SB, Chamberlin LA, Deeks CM, Jain A, Whitaker RC. Maternal feeding practices and beliefs and their relationships to overweight in early childhood. J Dev Behav Pediatr 2001; 22: 391-408.
        • Birch LL, Fisher JO, Davison KK. Learning to overeat: maternal use of restrictive feeding practices promotes girls' eating in the absence of hunger. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Aug;78(2):215-20.
        • Johnson SL, Birch LL. Parents’ and children’s adiposity and eating style. Pediatrics 1994; 94: 653-661.
        • Koivisto U, Fellenius J, Sjoden. Relations between parental mealtime practices and children’s food intake. Appetite 1994; 22: 245-258.
        • Melgar-Quinonez HR, Kaiser LL. Relationship of child-feeding practices to overweight in low-income Mexican-American preschool-aged children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004 Jul;104(7):1110-9.
        • Robinson TN, Kiernan M, Matheson DM, Haydel KF. Is parental control over children’s eating associated with childhood obesity? Results from a population-based sample of third graders. Ob Res 2001; 9: 306-312.
        • Saelens BE, Ernst MM, Epstein LH. Maternal child feeding practices and obesity: a discordant sibling analysis. Int J Eat Disord 2000; 27:459-463.
        • Sherman JB, Alexander MA, Dean AH, Kim M. Obesity in Mexican-American and Anglo children. Prog Cardiovasc Nurs. 1995 Winter;10(1):27-34.
        • Wardle J, Sanderson WS, Guthrie CA, Rapoport L, Plomin R. Parental feeding style and the intergenerational transmission of obesity risk. Obes Res 2002; 10: 453-462. Twins Early Development Study.
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Parent Control over Child Diet 2004
       
    Is parental encouragement/pressure to eat associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      Parental encouragement/ pressure to eat is not associated with increased overweight in children.

    • Grade: II
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Parental Encouragement or Pressure to Eat and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Birch LL, Fisher JO, Davison KK. Learning to overeat: maternal use of restrictive feeding practices promotes girls' eating in the absence of hunger. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Aug;78(2):215-20.
        • Francis LA, Hofer SM, Birch LL. Predictors of maternal and child characteristics. Appetite 2001; 37: 231-243.
        • Koivisto U, Fellenius J, Sjoden. Relations between parental mealtime practices and children’s food intake. Appetite 1994; 22: 245-258.
        • Lee Y, Mitchell DC, Smickiklas-Wright H, Birch LL. Diet quality, nutrient intake, weight status, and feeding environments of girls meeting or exceeding recommendations for total dietary fat of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics 2001; 107: e95.
        • Melgar-Quinonez HR, Kaiser LL. Relationship of child-feeding practices to overweight in low-income Mexican-American preschool-aged children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004 Jul;104(7):1110-9.
        • Robinson TN, Kiernan M, Matheson DM, Haydel KF. Is parental control over children’s eating associated with childhood obesity? Results from a population-based sample of third graders. Ob Res 2001; 9: 306-312.
        • Spruijt-Metz D, Lindquist CH, et.al. Relation between mothers’ child-feeding practices and children’s adiposity. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;75:581-586.
        • Wardle J, Sanderson WS, Guthrie CA, Rapoport L, Plomin R. Parental feeding style and the intergenerational transmission of obesity risk. Obes Res 2002; 10: 453-462. Twins Early Development Study.
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Pressure to Eat 2004
       
    Is parental restriction of highly palatable foods associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      Parental restriction of highly palatable foods may promote children’s desire for such forbidden foods, causing dysregulation of caloric intake and overeating. It appears that this child-feeding practice is associated with overweight in children; however a majority of the research has been conducted among non-Hispanic, white girls and may be applicable only to this population.

    • Grade: II
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Parental Restriction of Highly Palatable Foods and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Birch LL, Fisher JO. Mothers’ child-feeding practices influence daughters’ eating and weight. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000; 71: 1054-1061.
        • Birch LL, Fisher JO, Davison KK. Learning to overeat: maternal use of restrictive feeding practices promotes girls' eating in the absence of hunger. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Aug;78(2):215-20.
        • Davison KK, Birch LL. Weight status, parent reaction, and self-concept in five-year-old girls. Pediatrics 2001; 107: 46-53.
        • Fisher JO, Birch LL. Restricting access to foods and children’s eating. Appetite 1999; 32: 405-419.
        • Fisher JO, Birch LL. Restricting access to palatable foods affects children’s behavioral response, food selection and intake. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 69: 1,264-1,272.
        • Fisher JO, Birch LL. Eating in the absence of hunger and overweight in girls from 5 to 7 y of age. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Jul;76(1):226-31.
        • Francis LA, Hofer SM, Birch LL. Predictors of maternal and child characteristics. Appetite 2001; 37: 231-243.
        • Lee Y, Mitchell DC, Smickiklas-Wright H, Birch LL. Diet quality, nutrient intake, weight status, and feeding environments of girls meeting or exceeding recommendations for total dietary fat of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics 2001; 107: e95.
        • Melgar-Quinonez HR, Kaiser LL. Relationship of child-feeding practices to overweight in low-income Mexican-American preschool-aged children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004 Jul;104(7):1110-9.
        • Spruijt-Metz D, Lindquist CH, et.al. Relation between mothers’ child-feeding practices and children’s adiposity. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002;75:581-586.
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Parental Restriction on Child Diet 2004
       
    Is using food as a reward (Instrumental feeding) & emotional feeding associated with higher risk or prevalence of overweight among children?
    • Conclusion

      Based on limited evidence the parental child-feeding practices, Using food as a reward (Instrumental feeding) & Emotional Feeding, which may be considered a specific type of parental control over child’s dietary intake, do not appear to be associated with overweight in children.

    • Grade: III
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    • Evidence Summary: Using Food as a Reward (Instrumental Feeding) & Emotional Feeding and Childhood Overweight
      • Detail
      • Quality Rating Summary
        For a summary of the Quality Rating results, click here.
      • Worksheets
        • Wardle J, Sanderson WS, Guthrie CA, Rapoport L, Plomin R. Parental feeding style and the intergenerational transmission of obesity risk. Obes Res 2002; 10: 453-462. Twins Early Development Study.
    • Search Plan and Results: Family Influences: Instrumental feeding 2003
       
 
Close

Copyright 2022 Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (Academy), All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy. LX-135-131