Hodder Rebecca K, O'Brien Kate M, Stacey Fiona G, Wyse Rebecca J, Clinton-McHarg Tara, Tzelepis Flora, James Erica L, Bartlem Kate M, Nathan Nicole K, Sutherland Rachel, Robson Emma, Yoong Sze Lin, Wolfenden Luke
Hunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Locked Bag 10, Wallsend, Australia, 2287.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 17;5(5):CD008552. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008552.pub5.
Insufficient consumption of fruits and vegetables in childhood increases the risk of future non-communicable diseases, including cardiovascular disease. Interventions to increase consumption of fruit and vegetables, such as those focused on specific child-feeding strategies and parent nutrition education interventions in early childhood may therefore be an effective strategy in reducing this disease burden.
To assess the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and associated adverse events of interventions designed to increase the consumption of fruit, vegetables or both amongst children aged five years and under.
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two clinical trials registries to identify eligible trials on 25 January 2018. We searched Proquest Dissertations and Theses in November 2017. We reviewed reference lists of included trials and handsearched three international nutrition journals. We contacted authors of included studies to identify further potentially relevant trials.
We included randomised controlled trials, including cluster-randomised controlled trials and cross-over trials, of any intervention primarily targeting consumption of fruit, vegetables or both among children aged five years and under, and incorporating a dietary or biochemical assessment of fruit or vegetable consumption. Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of identified papers; a third review author resolved disagreements.
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risks of bias of included studies; a third review author resolved disagreements. Due to unexplained heterogeneity, we used random-effects models in meta-analyses for the primary review outcomes where we identified sufficient trials. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) to account for the heterogeneity of fruit and vegetable consumption measures. We conducted assessments of risks of bias and evaluated the quality of evidence (GRADE approach) using Cochrane procedures.
We included 63 trials with 178 trial arms and 11,698 participants. Thirty-nine trials examined the impact of child-feeding practices (e.g. repeated food exposure) in increasing child vegetable intake. Fourteen trials examined the impact of parent nutrition education in increasing child fruit and vegetable intake. Nine studies examined the impact of multicomponent interventions (e.g. parent nutrition education and preschool policy changes) in increasing child fruit and vegetable intake. One study examined the effect of a nutrition education intervention delivered to children in increasing child fruit and vegetable intake.We judged 14 of the 63 included trials as free from high risks of bias across all domains; performance, detection and attrition bias were the most common domains judged at high risk of bias for the remaining studies.There is very low quality evidence that child-feeding practices versus no intervention may have a small positive effect on child vegetable consumption equivalent to an increase of 3.50 g as-desired consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.33, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.54; participants = 1741; studies = 13). Multicomponent interventions versus no intervention may have a very small effect on child consumption of fruit and vegetables (SMD 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.66; participants = 2009; studies = 5; low-quality evidence), equivalent to an increase of 0.37 cups of fruit and vegetables per day. It is uncertain whether there are any short-term differences in child consumption of fruit and vegetables in meta-analyses of trials examining parent nutrition education versus no intervention (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.28; participants = 3078; studies = 11; very low-quality evidence).Insufficient data were available to assess long-term effectiveness, cost effectiveness and unintended adverse consequences of interventions. Studies reported receiving governmental or charitable funds, except for four studies reporting industry funding.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite identifying 63 eligible trials of various intervention approaches, the evidence for how to increase children's fruit and vegetable consumption remains limited. There was very low- and low-quality evidence respectively that child-feeding practice and multicomponent interventions may lead to very small increases in fruit and vegetable consumption in children aged five years and younger. It is uncertain whether parent nutrition education interventions are effective in increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in children aged five years and younger. Given that the quality of the evidence is very low or low, future research will likely change estimates and conclusions. Long-term follow-up is required and future research should adopt more rigorous methods to advance the field.This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
儿童时期水果和蔬菜摄入量不足会增加未来患非传染性疾病的风险,包括心血管疾病。因此,旨在增加水果和蔬菜摄入量的干预措施,如侧重于特定儿童喂养策略和幼儿期家长营养教育干预的措施,可能是减轻这种疾病负担的有效策略。
评估旨在增加5岁及以下儿童水果、蔬菜或两者摄入量的干预措施的有效性、成本效益及相关不良事件。
我们于2018年1月25日检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库、MEDLINE、Embase和两个临床试验注册库,以识别符合条件的试验。我们于2017年11月检索了Proquest学位论文数据库。我们查阅了纳入试验的参考文献列表,并手工检索了三份国际营养学期刊。我们联系了纳入研究的作者,以识别其他潜在相关试验。
我们纳入了随机对照试验,包括整群随机对照试验和交叉试验,这些试验主要针对5岁及以下儿童的水果、蔬菜或两者摄入量进行干预,并纳入了对水果或蔬菜摄入量的饮食或生化评估。两位综述作者独立筛选已识别论文的标题和摘要;第三位综述作者解决分歧。
两位综述作者独立提取数据并评估纳入研究的偏倚风险;第三位综述作者解决分歧。由于存在无法解释的异质性,我们在荟萃分析中对主要综述结局使用随机效应模型,前提是我们识别出足够数量的试验。我们计算标准化均数差(SMD)以考虑水果和蔬菜摄入量测量的异质性。我们使用Cochrane程序进行偏倚风险评估并评估证据质量(GRADE方法)。
我们纳入了63项试验,共178个试验组和11698名参与者。39项试验研究了儿童喂养方式(如反复接触食物)对增加儿童蔬菜摄入量的影响。14项试验研究了家长营养教育对增加儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量的影响。9项研究研究了多成分干预措施(如家长营养教育和学前政策改变)对增加儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量的影响。1项研究研究了针对儿童的营养教育干预措施对增加儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量的效果。我们判断63项纳入试验中的14项在所有领域均不存在高偏倚风险;表现、检测和失访偏倚是其余研究中被判断为高偏倚风险的最常见领域。有非常低质量的证据表明,与不进行干预相比,儿童喂养方式可能对儿童蔬菜摄入量有小的积极影响,相当于期望蔬菜摄入量增加3.50克(SMD 0.33,95%CI 0.13至0.54;参与者 = 1741;研究 = 13)。与不进行干预相比,多成分干预措施可能对儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量有非常小的影响(SMD 0.35,95%CI 0.04至0.66;参与者 = 2009;研究 = 5;低质量证据),相当于每天增加0.37杯水果和蔬菜。在对研究家长营养教育与不进行干预的试验进行荟萃分析时,不确定儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量是否存在任何短期差异(SMD 0.12,95%CI -0.03至0.28;参与者 = 3078;研究 = 11;非常低质量证据)。没有足够的数据来评估干预措施的长期有效性、成本效益和意外不良后果。除了4项报告有行业资助的研究外,其他研究报告均接受了政府或慈善资金。
尽管识别出63项关于各种干预方法的符合条件的试验,但关于如何增加儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量的证据仍然有限。分别有非常低质量和低质量的证据表明,儿童喂养方式和多成分干预措施可能导致5岁及以下儿童的水果和蔬菜摄入量有非常小的增加。不确定家长营养教育干预措施在增加5岁及以下儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量方面是否有效。鉴于证据质量非常低或低,未来的研究可能会改变估计值和结论。需要进行长期随访,未来的研究应采用更严格的方法来推动该领域的发展。这是一篇动态系统评价。动态系统评价提供了一种更新评价的新方法,即不断更新评价,并在有可用的相关新证据时将其纳入。有关该评价的当前状态,请参考Cochrane系统评价数据库。