Table 2

Percent significant findings within each pathway by study design1


Cross-sectional
Longitudinal
Experimental
Total

Pathway 1: Parenting ⇔ Child Weight
     Parenting styles:




          General
332 (1/3)3
100 (1/1)
0 (0/0)
33 (1/3)
          Feeding-Specific
100 (3/3)
0 (0/0)
0 (0/0)
100 (3/3)
     Parenting practices:




          Pressure to Eat
91 (10/11)
50 (1/2)
0 (0/0)
85 (11/13)
          Restriction
56 (5/9)
80 (4/5)
0 (0/1)
64 (9/14)
          Availability/Modeling
100 (1/1)
0 (0/1)
0 (0/0)
50 (1/2)
Pathway 2: Parenting ⇔ Child Eating
     Parenting styles:




          General
100 (2/2)
0 (0/0)
0 (0/0)
100 (2/2)
          Feeding-Specific
100 (1/1)
0 (0/0)
0 (0/0)
100 (1/1)
     Parenting practices:




          Pressure to Eat
100 (6/6)
100 (2/2)
100 (7/7)
100 (15/15)
          Restriction
100 (6/6)
100 (4/4)
100 (2/2)
100 (12/12)
          Availability/Modeling
91 (10/11)
100 (4/4)
67 (8/12)
81 (22/27)
Pathway 3: Child Eating ⇔ Child Weight4

50 (2/4)
75 (6/8)
0 (0/0)
67 (8/12)

Note: Because some studies address multiple constructs and/or pathways, studies included in proportions may overlap

1 Pathways based on the conceptual model presented in Figure 1

2 Proportion of significant studies within study design and pathway

3 Number of significant studies/total number of studies

4 Within the context of parenting styles and feeding practices

Ventura and Birch International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 2008 5:15   doi:10.1186/1479-5868-5-15