An mHealth Intervention to Reduce the Packing of Discretionary Foods in Children's Lunch Boxes in Early Childhood Education and Care Services: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Sustaining Healthy Habits: The Enduring Impact of Combined School-Family Interventions on Consuming Sugar-Sweetened Beverages among Pilot Chinese Schoolchildren

This study assesses the enduring impact of combined school- and family-based interventions on reducing the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) among schoolchildren in China. Two primary schools were assigned at random to either the Intervention Group or the Control Group, in Nanjing, eastern China. All students were in grade three and received an invitation to participate. In the first year, students in the Intervention Group received one-year intervention measures, including monthly monitoring, aiming to decrease the consumption of SSBs. Students in the Control Group only received regular monitoring without interventions. In the second year, both groups received only regular monitoring, without active interventions. A generalized estimating equations model (GEE) was used to assess the intervention effects. After two years, relative to the Control Group, the Intervention Group had a significantly improved knowledge of SSBs and an improved family environment with parents. In the Intervention Group, 477 students (97.3%) had adequate knowledge about SSBs, compared to 302 students (83.2%) in the Control Group (X2 = 52.708, p < 0.001). Two years later, the number of students who stated 'my home always has SSBs' in the Intervention Group (7.8%) was fewer than that in the Control Group (12.4%), which was a statistically significant finding (p < 0.05). One year later, both the frequency and the quantity of SSB consumption in the Intervention Group were less than those in the Control Group; such differences between the groups remained statistically significant for the quantity but not for the frequency of SSB consumption two years later. In the Intervention Group, the frequency of SSB consumption was significantly reduced by 1.0 times per week, compared to a reduction of 0.1 times per week in the Control Group in the first year (p < 0.05). In the second year, the frequency of SSB consumption was reduced by 0.8 times per week in the Intervention Group, compared to 0.5 times per week in the Control Group (p > 0.05). In the first year, the volume of SSB consumption was significantly reduced by 233 mL per week in the Intervention Group, compared to an increase of 107 mL per week in the Control Group (p < 0.05). In the second year, the volume of SSB consumption was reduced by 122 mL per week in the Intervention Group compared to an increase of 31 mL per week in the Control Group (p > 0.05). The combined school-based and family-based interventions had a positive effect on the students' knowledge of SSBs and their family dynamics during the first and second year. Relative to the Control Group, the Intervention Group had a statistically significant reduction in SSB consumption after 1 year, but not after 2 years.

Evidence-Based Implementation of the Family-Centered Model and the Use of Tele-Intervention in Early Childhood Services: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this review is to explore the evidence and efficacy of two trends in early childhood intervention services: the family-centered model and the use of tele-intervention.

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out following the PRISMA methodology and using three databases: Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus. The studies included were those aimed at children from 0 to 6 years of age, focused on early intervention, and which alluded to the family-centered model and/or tele-intervention.

RESULTS

a total of 33 studies were included. Five main themes were identified: (1) The participation of children and family is facilitated and improved by the family-centered model of care; (2) the feeling of competence, self-efficacy, satisfaction and empowerment in professionals and families have a positive impact on quality of life; (3) the use of tele-intervention as a tool for prevention and intervention; (4) preparation for telepractice can improve the development of commitment; (5) tele-intervention as a possible solution to contextual barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Tele-intervention in pediatrics is presented as a tool inherent to the family-centered model since its implementation involves several common strategies. Future lines of research should explore the use of this tool as a possible solution to contextual barriers.

Systems map of interventions to improve dietary intake of pre-school aged children: A scoping review

Implementation and sustaining impact of early childhood nutrition interventions in practice remains a challenge. An understanding of the extent to which determinants across multiple levels of the food system are being addressed may improve success. This literature review aimed to synthesise the evidence on interventions targeting dietary intake and eating behaviours in preschool children using a systems approach. Eligible studies included intervention studies targeting the dietary intake of preschool children aged 2-5 years in high income countries, published in English after January 2000. Interventions were categorised to the Determinants of Nutrition and Eating (DONE) framework for children developed and evaluated by experts across multiple fields. The framework maps and ranks 411 factors driving eating behaviours and nutrition and can be used to systematically summarise determinants. DONE ranks each determinant for its perceived research priority. A total of 160 eligible studies were identified. Most interventions targeted interpersonal (n = 101, 63.1%) and individual (n = 85, 53.1%) level determinants, with fewer targeting environmental (n = 55, 34.4%) and policy level (n = 17, 10.6%) determinants. The most frequently addressed determinants were Parental Resources and Risk Factors (n = 85) and Children's Food Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (n = 67). These determinants had a Moderate research priority rating. Home Food Availability and Accessibility at the environmental level is classified as the highest research priority, however, only 15 of 160 interventions addressed this determinant. This review highlights home food availability and accessibility as potential leverage points for future interventions to improve children's dietary intake and eating behaviours.

Assessing the scalability of healthy eating interventions within the early childhood education and care setting: secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) is a recommended setting for the delivery of health eating interventions 'at scale' (i.e. to large numbers of childcare services) to improve child public health nutrition. Appraisal of the 'scalability' (suitability for delivery at scale) of interventions is recommended to guide public health decision-making. This study describes the extent to which factors required to assess scalability are reported among ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.

DESIGN

Studies from a recent Cochrane systematic review assessing the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC for improving child dietary intake were included. The reporting of factors of scalability was assessed against domains outlined within the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT). The tool recommends decision makers consider the problem, the intervention, strategic and political context, effectiveness, costs, fidelity and adaptation, reach and acceptability, delivery setting and workforce, implementation infrastructure and sustainability. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer.

SETTING

ECEC.

PARTICIPANTS

Children 6 months to 6 years.

RESULTS

Of thirty-eight included studies, none reported all factors within the ISAT. All studies reported the problem, the intervention, effectiveness and the delivery workforce and setting. The lowest reported domains were intervention costs (13 % of studies) and sustainability (16 % of studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate there is a lack of reporting of some key factors of scalability for ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. Future studies should measure and report such factors to support policy and practice decision makers when selecting interventions to be scaled-up.

Healthy eating interventions delivered in early childhood education and care settings for improving the diet of children aged six months to six years

BACKGROUND

Dietary intake during early childhood can have implications on child health and developmental trajectories. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are recommended settings to deliver healthy eating interventions as they provide access to many children during this important period. Healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings can include strategies targeting the curriculum (e.g. nutrition education), ethos and environment (e.g. menu modification) and partnerships (e.g. workshops for families). Despite guidelines supporting the delivery of healthy eating interventions in this setting, little is known about their impact on child health.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings for improving dietary intake in children aged six months to six years, relative to usual care, no intervention or an alternative, non-dietary intervention. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on physical outcomes (e.g. child body mass index (BMI), weight, waist circumference), language and cognitive outcomes, social/emotional and quality-of-life outcomes. We also report on cost and adverse consequences of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched eight electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus and SportDiscus on 24 February 2022. We searched reference lists of included studies, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, and contacted authors of relevant papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs, factorial RCTs, multiple baseline RCTs and randomised cross-over trials, of healthy eating interventions targeting children aged six months to six years that were conducted within the ECEC setting. ECEC settings included preschools, nurseries, kindergartens, long day care and family day care. To be included, studies had to include at least one intervention component targeting child diet within the ECEC setting and measure child dietary or physical outcomes, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for all studies against 12 criteria within RoB 1, which allows for consideration of how selection, performance, attrition, publication and reporting biases impact outcomes. We resolved discrepancies via consensus or by consulting a third review author. Where we identified studies with suitable data and homogeneity, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model; otherwise, we described findings using vote-counting approaches and via harvest plots. For measures with similar metrics, we calculated mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for primary and secondary outcomes where studies used different measures. We applied GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for dietary, cost and adverse outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 52 studies that investigated 58 interventions (described across 96 articles). All studies were cluster-RCTs. Twenty-nine studies were large (≥ 400 participants) and 23 were small (< 400 participants). Of the 58 interventions, 43 targeted curriculum, 56 targeted ethos and environment, and 50 targeted partnerships. Thirty-eight interventions incorporated all three components. For the primary outcomes (dietary outcomes), we assessed 19 studies as overall high risk of bias, with performance and detection bias being most commonly judged as high risk of bias. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions versus usual practice or no intervention may have a positive effect on child diet quality (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.65; P = 0.03, I2 = 91%; 6 studies, 1973 children) but the evidence is very uncertain. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely increase children's consumption of fruit (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18; P < 0.01, I2 = 0%; 11 studies, 2901 children). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on children's consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.25; P =0.08, I2 = 70%; 13 studies, 3335 children). There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely result in little to no difference in children's consumption of non-core (i.e. less healthy/discretionary) foods (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.08; P = 0.48, I2 = 16%; 7 studies, 1369 children) or consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.14; P = 0.41, I2 = 45%; 3 studies, 522 children). Thirty-six studies measured BMI, BMI z-score, weight, overweight and obesity, or waist circumference, or a combination of some or all of these. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child BMI (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07; P = 0.30, I2 = 65%; 15 studies, 3932 children) or in child BMI z-score (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; P = 0.36, I2 = 0%; 17 studies; 4766 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may decrease child weight (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; P = 0.09, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 2071 children) and risk of overweight and obesity (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1070 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may be cost-effective but the evidence is very uncertain (6 studies). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may have little to no effect on adverse consequences but the evidence is very uncertain (3 studies). Few studies measured language and cognitive skills (n = 2), social/emotional outcomes (n = 2) and quality of life (n = 3).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may improve child diet quality slightly, but the evidence is very uncertain, and likely increase child fruit consumption slightly. There is uncertainty about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on vegetable consumption. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child consumption of non-core foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Healthy eating interventions could have favourable effects on child weight and risk of overweight and obesity, although there was little to no difference in BMI and BMI z-scores. Future studies exploring the impact of specific intervention components, and describing cost-effectiveness and adverse outcomes are needed to better understand how to maximise the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.

Planting Seeds for the Future: Scoping Review of Child Health Promotion Apps for Parents

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, parents use child health promotion apps to find health information. An overview of child health promotion apps for parents currently does not exist. The scope of child health topics addressed by parent apps is thus needed, including how they are evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to describe existing reported mobile health (mHealth) parent apps of middle- to high-income countries that promote child health. The focus centers on apps developed in the last 5 years, showing how the reported apps are evaluated, and listing reported outcomes found.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted according to PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews) guidelines to identify parent apps or web-based programs on child health promotion published between January 2016 and June 2021 in 5 databases: PubMed, ERIC, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Separate sources were sought through an expert network. Included studies were summarized and analyzed through a systematic and descriptive content analysis, including keywords, year of publication, country of origin, aims/purpose, study population/sample size, intervention type, methodology/method(s), broad topic(s), evaluation, and study outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 39 studies met the inclusion criteria from 1040 database and 60 expert-identified studies. Keywords reflected the health topics and app foci. About 64% (25/39) of included studies were published after 2019 and most stemmed from the United States, Australian, and European-based research. Studies aimed to review or evaluate apps or conducted app-based study interventions. The number of participants ranged from 7 to 1200. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Interventions included 28 primary studies, 6 app feasibility studies, and 5 app or literature reviews. Eight separate topics were found: parental feeding and nutrition, physical activity, maternal-child health, parent-child health, healthy environment, dental health, mental health, and sleep. Study intervention evaluations cited behavior change theories in 26 studies and evaluations were carried out with a variety of topic-specific, adapted, self-developed, or validated questionnaires and evaluation tools. To evaluate apps, user input and qualitative evaluations were often combined with surveys and frequently rated with the Mobile App Rating Scale. Outcomes reported some positive effects, while several intervention studies saw no effect at all. Effectively evaluating changes in behavior through apps, recruiting target groups, and retaining app engagement were challenges cited.

CONCLUSIONS

New parents are a key target group for child health apps, but evaluating child health promotion apps remains a challenge. Whether tailored to parent needs or adapted to the specific topic, apps should be rooted in a transparent theoretical groundwork. Applicable lessons for parent apps from existing research are to tailor app content, include intuitive and adaptive features, and embed well-founded parameters for long-term effect evaluation on child health promotion.

Healthy eating interventions delivered in early childhood education and care settings for improving the diet of children aged six months to six years

BACKGROUND

Dietary intake during early childhood can have implications on child health and developmental trajectories. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are recommended settings to deliver healthy eating interventions as they provide access to many children during this important period. Healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings can include strategies targeting the curriculum (e.g. nutrition education), ethos and environment (e.g. menu modification) and partnerships (e.g. workshops for families). Despite guidelines supporting the delivery of healthy eating interventions in this setting, little is known about their impact on child health.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings for improving dietary intake in children aged six months to six years, relative to usual care, no intervention or an alternative, non-dietary intervention. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on physical outcomes (e.g. child body mass index (BMI), weight, waist circumference), language and cognitive outcomes, social/emotional and quality-of-life outcomes. We also report on cost and adverse consequences of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched eight electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus and SportDiscus on 24 February 2022. We searched reference lists of included studies, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, and contacted authors of relevant papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs, factorial RCTs, multiple baseline RCTs and randomised cross-over trials, of healthy eating interventions targeting children aged six months to six years that were conducted within the ECEC setting. ECEC settings included preschools, nurseries, kindergartens, long day care and family day care. To be included, studies had to include at least one intervention component targeting child diet within the ECEC setting and measure child dietary or physical outcomes, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for all studies against 12 criteria within RoB 1, which allows for consideration of how selection, performance, attrition, publication and reporting biases impact outcomes. We resolved discrepancies via consensus or by consulting a third review author. Where we identified studies with suitable data and homogeneity, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model; otherwise, we described findings using vote-counting approaches and via harvest plots. For measures with similar metrics, we calculated mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for primary and secondary outcomes where studies used different measures. We applied GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for dietary, cost and adverse outcomes.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 52 studies that investigated 58 interventions (described across 96 articles). All studies were cluster-RCTs. Twenty-nine studies were large (≥ 400 participants) and 23 were small (< 400 participants). Of the 58 interventions, 43 targeted curriculum, 56 targeted ethos and environment, and 50 targeted partnerships. Thirty-eight interventions incorporated all three components. For the primary outcomes (dietary outcomes), we assessed 19 studies as overall high risk of bias, with performance and detection bias being most commonly judged as high risk of bias. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions versus usual practice or no intervention may have a positive effect on child diet quality (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.65; P = 0.03, I2 = 91%; 6 studies, 1973 children) but the evidence is very uncertain. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely increase children's consumption of fruit (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18; P < 0.01, I2 = 0%; 11 studies, 2901 children). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on children's consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.25; P =0.08, I2 = 70%; 13 studies, 3335 children). There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely result in little to no difference in children's consumption of non-core (i.e. less healthy/discretionary) foods (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.08; P = 0.48, I2 = 16%; 7 studies, 1369 children) or consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.14; P = 0.41, I2 = 45%; 3 studies, 522 children). Thirty-six studies measured BMI, BMI z-score, weight, overweight and obesity, or waist circumference, or a combination of some or all of these. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child BMI (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07; P = 0.30, I2 = 65%; 15 studies, 3932 children) or in child BMI z-score (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; P = 0.36, I2 = 0%; 17 studies; 4766 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may decrease child weight (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; P = 0.09, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 2071 children) and risk of overweight and obesity (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1070 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may be cost-effective but the evidence is very uncertain (6 studies). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may have little to no effect on adverse consequences but the evidence is very uncertain (3 studies). Few studies measured language and cognitive skills (n = 2), social/emotional outcomes (n = 2) and quality of life (n = 3).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may improve child diet quality slightly, but the evidence is very uncertain, and likely increase child fruit consumption slightly. There is uncertainty about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on vegetable consumption. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child consumption of non-core foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Healthy eating interventions could have favourable effects on child weight and risk of overweight and obesity, although there was little to no difference in BMI and BMI z-scores. Future studies exploring the impact of specific intervention components, and describing cost-effectiveness and adverse outcomes are needed to better understand how to maximise the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.