Autonomy at the table: the role of food parenting practices in children's fruit and vegetable consumption - a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

Abstract

Introduction: Despite parents' efforts, many children have nutrient-poor diets with insufficient fruit and vegetable consumption. Parents significantly influence children's eating habits at home through their food parenting practices. Although previous systematic reviews have explored food parenting practices, they were conducted some time ago. Therefore, it is timely to investigate the relationship between autonomy-supportive practices and fruit/vegetable consumption in children aged 2 to 12.

Methods and analysis: The systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will be conducted by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. The databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS and Google Scholar will be searched with no restrictions on publication year, country or language. In addition to the databases, the search will be supplemented by manual searches of reference lists from the included articles. Studies that assess at least one parental autonomy-supportive food practice and its relationship with fruit and vegetable consumption in healthy children aged 2 to 12 years will be included. Results will be organised in tables and figures. A meta-analysis will be conducted if data availability permits. Risk of bias will be assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. All steps will be conducted independently by two reviewers.

Ethics and dissemination: Findings from this review will be important for understanding the influence of parental autonomy-supportive food practices on children's fruit and vegetable consumption, potentially informing health practices that promote healthy eating habits from childhood. No ethical approval is required for this review, and we plan to publish the findings in a peer-reviewed journal.

Prospero registration number: CRD42023442680.

Keywords: Child; Family; Health; Parents.

Figure 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 flow diagram for the identification, screening and inclusion of studies in the review. *Consider, if feasible to do so, reporting the number of records identified from each database or register searched (rather than the total number across all databases/registers). **If automation tools were used, indicate how many records were excluded by a human and how many were excluded by automation tools. Source: Page MJ, et al. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. This work is licensed under CC BY 4.0. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.