Evidence mapPaperPMID 37606067Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2023

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

Sze Lin Yoong, Melanie Lum, Luke Wolfenden, Jacklyn Jackson, Courtney Barnes, Alix E Hall, Sam McCrabb, Nicole Pearson, Cassandra Lane, Jannah Z Jones and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Evaluation of Short Videos Supporting Healthy Eating and Physical Activity in Early Childhood Education: The Small Bites for Big Steps Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Assessing the implementation of healthy eating and physical activity policies and practices in Early Childhood Education and Care in New South Wales, Australia: A cross-sectional study.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  9. Consolidating the evidence on the effectiveness of strategies to promote vegetable intake in priority settings: An overview of systematic reviews.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Sze Lin YoongGlobal Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition, Institute for Health Transformation, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Victoria, Australia.
Melanie LumHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.
Luke WolfendenHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.
Jacklyn JacksonSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Courtney BarnesHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.
Alix E HallSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Sam McCrabbSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Nicole PearsonHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.
Cassandra LaneHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.
Jannah Z JonesHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.
Erin NolanSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Lauren DinourCollege of Education and Human Services, Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, USA.
Therese McDonnellSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Debbie BoothAuchmuty Library, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Alice GradyHunter New England Population Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDietary 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.

objectivesTo 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

methodsWe 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

resultsWe 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, I AUTHORS'

conclusionsECEC-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.

Indexed as

Diet, HealthyOverweightChildChild, PreschoolDietFruitHumansObesityVegetables

Identifiers

PMID37606067
PMCPMC10443896

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.