Search

Background: Children with underweight in the first 2 years have lower body mass index z‐score (zBMI) and height‐for‐age z‐score (HAZ) in later childhood. It is not known if underweight in the first 2 years is associated with nutrition risk in later childhood. Objective: (1) Determine the relationship between underweight (zBMI < −2) in the first 2 years and nutrition risk measured by the Nutrition Screening for Toddlers and Preschoolers (NutriSTEP) score from 18 months to 5 years. (2) Explore the relationship between underweight in the first 2 years and the NutriSTEP subscores for eating behaviours and dietary intake from 18 months to 5 years. Methods: This was a prospective study, including healthy full‐term children in Canada aged 0–5 years. zBMI was calculated using measured heights and weights and the WHO growth standards. NutriSTEP score was measured using a parent‐completed survey and ranged from 0 to 68. Nutrition risk was defined as a score ≥21. Linear mixed effects models were used. Results: Four thousand nine hundred twenty‐nine children were included in this study. At enrolment, 51.9% of participants were male. The prevalence of underweight children was 8.8%. Underweight in the first 2 years was associated with higher NutriSTEP (0.79, 95% CI: 0.29,1.29), higher eating behaviour subscore (0.24, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.46) at 3 years and higher odds of nutrition risk (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.07,1.82) at 5 years. Conclusions: Children with underweight in the first 2 years had higher nutrition risk in later childhood. Further research is needed to understand the factors which influence these relationships. Key points: In this prospective cohort study of 4929 children aged 0–5 years, children with underweight in the first 2 years of life had higher odds of nutrition risk at 5 years of age compared to children without underweight in the first 2 years (p = 0.02). Further research is needed to understand the factors which influence these relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We hypothesize that children characterized by deprived factors have poorer health outcomes. We aim to identify clustering of determinants and estimate risk of early childhood diseases. This 1993–2019 longitudinal cohort study combines three Canadian pediatric cohorts and their families. Mothers and children are clustered using latent class analysis (LCA) by 16 indicators in three domains (maternal and newborn; socioeconomic status [SES] and neighbourhood; environmental exposures). Hazard ratios (HR) of childhood asthma, allergic rhinitis (AR), and eczema are quantified with Cox proportional hazard (PH) regression. Rate ratios (RR) of children's health services use (HSU) are estimated with Poisson regression. Here we report the inclusion of 15,724 mother–child pairs; our LCA identifies four mother-clusters. Classes 1 and 2 mothers are older (30–40 s), non-immigrants with university education, living in high SES neighbourhoods; Class 2 mothers have poorer air quality and less greenspace. Classes 3 and 4 mothers are younger (20–30 s), likely an immigrant/refugee, with high school-to-college education, living in lower SES neighborhoods with poorer air quality and less greenspace. Children's outcomes differ by Class, in comparison to Class 1. Classes 3 and 4 children have higher risks of asthma (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.11–1.37 and HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.22–1.59, respectively), and similar higher risks of AR and eczema. Children with AR in Class 3 have 20% higher all-cause physician visits (RR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.10–1.30) and those with eczema have 18% higher all-cause emergency department visits (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.09–1.28) and 14% higher all-cause physician visits (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.09–1.19). Multifactorial-LCA mother-clusters may characterize associations of children's health outcomes and care, adjusting for interrelationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Centre-based childcare has been identified as a promising environment for obesity prevention in early childhood, but the longitudinal relationships between attending centre-based childcare and child obesity are not well understood. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the longitudinal associations between centre-based childcare attendance in early childhood and child body mass index compared with other childcare settings or parental care. Subgroup analyses will also be conducted to determine if socioeconomic factors and characteristics of the childcare setting modify the relationships., Methods: Databases that will be searched include MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Database and Web of Science. Longitudinal prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies and intervention trials conducted in middle-income and high-income countries will be included in the search strategy. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses will be conducted to explore factors that may modify the findings. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and quality of evidence assessments will be conducted independently and in duplicate by two reviewers. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Exposure tool. Meta-analysis will be conducted using random effects models to account for between-study variation. Heterogeneity across included studies will be estimated using the I 2 statistic. If meta-analysis is not possible, a narrative summary will be provided. The quality of the evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this study since no data will be collected. Findings aim to inform interventions and guide efforts in childcare settings to support optimal child growth. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Results may be of relevance for childcare and public health policy, researchers, parents and healthcare practitioners., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42023436911., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JLM has received research funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Physician Services and Ontario SPOR Support Unit; an unrestricted research grant for a completed investigator-initiated study from the Dairy Farmers of Canada (2011–2012); and Ddrops provided non-financial support (vitamin D supplements) for an investigator-initiated study on vitamin D and respiratory tract infections (2011–2015). CB has received research funding from the Canadian Institute for Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Physician Services, Leong Center at the University of Toronto and Centre for Addictions and Mental Health; Ontario Child Health Support Unit Impact Child Health Award; and a Walmart Community Grant through the SickKids Foundation for a study on food insecurity in the inpatient hospital setting. MK, MP, JP and CDGK-S have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Parents' decisions to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 are complex and often informed by discussions with primary care physicians. However, little is known about physicians' perspectives on COVID-19 vaccinations for children or their experiences counselling parents in their decision-making. We explored physicians' experiences providing COVID-19 vaccination recommendations to parents and their reflections on the contextual factors that shaped these experiences., Design: We conducted an interpretive qualitative study using in-depth interviews. We analyzed the data using reflexive thematic analysis and a socioecological framework., Setting: This study involved primary care practices associated with The Applied Research Group for Kids (TARGet Kids!) primary care research network in the Greater Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada., Participants: Participants were 10 primary care physicians, including family physicians, paediatricians and paediatric subspecialists., Results: Participants discussed elements at the individual level (their identity, role, and knowledge), the interpersonal level (their relationships with families, responsiveness to parents' concerns, and efforts to build trust) and structural level (contextual factors related to the evolving COVID-19 climate, health system pandemic response, and constraints on care delivery) that influenced their experiences providing recommendations to parents. Our findings illustrated that physicians' interactions with families were shaped by a confluence of their own perspectives, their responses to parents' perspectives, and the evolving landscape of the broader pandemic., Conclusions: Our study underscores the social and relational nature of vaccination decision-making and highlights the multiple influences on primary care physicians' experiences providing COVID-19 vaccination recommendations to parents. Our findings offer suggestions for future COVID-19 vaccination programmes for children. Delivery of new COVID-19 vaccinations for children may be well suited within primary care offices, where trusting relationships are established, but physicians need support in staying knowledgeable about emerging information, communicating available evidence to parents to inform their decision-making and dedicating time for vaccination counselling., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Adverse social conditions affect children's development and health outcomes from preconception throughout their life course. Early identification of adverse conditions is essential for early support of children and their families. Healthcare contacts with children provide a unique opportunity to screen for adverse social conditions and to take preventive action to identify and address emerging, potentially harmful or accumulating social problems. The aim of our study is to identify and describe available screening tools in outpatient and inpatient healthcare settings that capture social conditions that may affect children's development, health or well-being., Methods and Analysis: We will conduct a systematic review and will report the results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. A systematic search of three databases (PubMed (Ovid), PsycInfo (EBSCOhost) and Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate)) for English-language and German-language articles from 2014 to date will be conducted. We will include peer-reviewed articles that develop, describe, test or use an instrument to screen children for multiple social conditions in paediatric clinics or other outpatient or inpatient child healthcare settings. Key study characteristics and information on screening tools will be extracted and presented in structured tables to summarise the available evidence. We will assess the methodological quality of the instruments with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this study as we will not be collecting any personal data. Dissemination will consist of publications, presentations, and other knowledge translation activities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)