You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Behavioral Sciences
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open Access

9 June 2023

Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a French Version of the Child Feeding Questionnaire among Black Mothers Living in Ottawa (Canada)

,
,
and
1
School of Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
2
Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3T 1J4, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Behav. Sci.2023, 13(6), 487;https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13060487
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

The Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) is a well-established tool used to assess parental beliefs, attitudes, and child feeding practices, with a focus on childhood obesity proneness. To date, there is no French version of the CFQ, nor any Canadian studies assessing its construct validity. The aim of this study was to assess the construct validity and the reliability of a French version of the CFQ among Black mothers (n = 136) of school-aged children living in Ottawa (Canada). The final best fitting model included 7 factors, 20 items, and 1 error covariance. This model was retained as the final model as it (1) excluded two items with very low factor loadings; (2) had the lowest χ2, AIC, BIC, RMSEA, and SRMR values; and (3) had CFI and TLI values ≥ 0.95. Internal consistency ranged from poor to good; the restriction subscale had the lowest internal consistency, followed by the perceived responsibility, pressure to eat, perceive child weight, concern about child weight, and monitoring scales, respectively. Our results showed that a seven-factor model with minor modifications was best fitted to the current data. Future studies are needed to test the validity and reliability of the CFQ in other population groups and among fathers.

1. Introduction

Childhood obesity is a growing public health problem involving both immediate and long-term consequences on physical (e.g., higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease) and mental (e.g., lower self-esteem, higher risk of developing depression) health [1,2]. It is well-established within the scientific literature that, due to differences in genetic backgrounds, health-related behaviors, and socioeconomic status, the prevalence of excess weight varies across racial and ethnic groups [3,4]. In Canada, Black individuals are among the highest-risk population groups, with overweight and obesity rates nearing 50% and 29% among adults and children (2–17 years old), respectively [3,5,6].
Socioecological factors such as family have been shown to influence childhood obesity risk [7,8]. According to Anderson et al., “family is the first and most fundamental socio-environmental context in which eating patterns are established” [9]. Through shaping the family’s food environment, parents influence their child’s eating behaviors and perhaps their lifelong weight trajectories [10,11]. Studies assessing parental child feeding practices have reported that controlling child feeding practices such as restriction and pressure to eat could interfere with the child’s ability to recognize internal hunger and satiety cues, which could eventually impact the child’s weight status [12,13,14,15]. In this regard, several cross-sectional and longitudinal studies have reported that parents who use restrictive feeding practices (i.e., restricting their children’s access to foods, particularly “unhealthy” foods) were more likely to have children with a higher body mass index [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Conversely, parental use of pressure to eat (i.e., pressuring their children to eat more food, typically at mealtimes) was predominately found in children with a lower BMI [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Parental use of monitoring practices (i.e., overseeing their child’s eating) was not associated with child’s BMI in most studies [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Some longitudinal studies further suggest that parents’ perceptions of their child’s weight status influence the child’s weight over time [19,20,21]. These studies show that children whose parents perceived them as having overweight or obesity were more likely to gain and maintain excess weight over time [19,20,21]. Understanding parents’ child feeding practices and how they relate to children’s present and future dietary intakes, eating behaviors, and weight status is important as it might help identify ways to improve overweight and obesity prevention and intervention strategies [12,13,14,15].
For over twenty years, research on child feeding practices has been conducted using various validated tools including the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) [22,23,24]. The CFQ is a well-established and validated tool used to assess parental beliefs, attitudes, and practices regarding child feeding, with a focus on obesity proneness in children [25]. The CFQ comprises four subscales assessing parental perceptions and concerns about weight status (i.e., perceived parent’s weight, perceived child’s weight, parental concern about child’s weight, and perceived parental responsibility) and three subscales assessing parental control attitudes and practices in child feeding (restriction, pressure to eat, and monitoring). This questionnaire was developed by Birch et al. (2001) and initially validated on a mainly White sample [25]. Afterwards, several researchers have explored the questionnaire’s psychometric properties and subscales’ structure in various populations such as Hispanic American [9,26], African American [9,26,27], Australian [28], Japanese [29], Turkish [30], Swedish [31], Chinese [32], Spanish [33], German [34], and Arab [35] populations (see Table 1). While acceptable modified structures were presented in previous validation studies, the conceptualization and measurement of some subscales, such as restriction, perceived child’s weight, and perceived parent’s weight, have been questioned in some studies [9,29,30,31,36]. The restriction subscale has been identified in multiple studies to be unstable [9,27,28,29,30,31,33,36]. In fact, some specific items of the restriction subscale appear to be problematic, namely those related to food used as a reward. Several approaches have been used to improve the stability of the restriction subscale, such as omitting some items [9,29,31,36], while others have created a new subscale named “food as a reward’’ with the two items of the restriction subscale [26,28,32,34].
Table 1. Characteristics of best-fitting models in previous studies assessing CFQ’s construct validity using CFA.
Assessing the cross-cultural and racial equivalence of the CFQ has been pointed out as a pending need in several reviews focusing on measures of parental feeding practices [22,23,24,37]. To date, there is no French version of the CFQ nor any Canadian study assessing its construct validity. Furthermore, there are very few Canadian studies assessing parental beliefs, attitudes, and practices regarding child feeding using the CFQ [38,39,40]. While Black individuals living in Canada have among the highest rates of obesity in the country, these studies have been conducted in predominantly White and English-speaking samples [38,39,40]. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the reliability and construct validity of a French version of the CFQ among Black mothers of school-aged children living in Ottawa (Canada).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

Mothers in this analytic sample were part of a cross-sectional study aiming to assess the social determinants of nutritional heath of 6-to-12-year-old children of African and Caribbean descent. The study, including recruitment strategies and findings, has been described in several previously published manuscripts [18,41,42,43,44,45]. The study was conducted between January 2014 and April 2015 in Ottawa (Canada). To be eligible for the study, mothers had to have at least one child aged between 6 and 12 years, to be born in sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, or Canada, and be able to understand and speak English or French. Due to genetics being a risk factor for overweight and obesity, mothers of adopted children were excluded. Children who had food allergies occasioning important dietary restrictions, and/or suffered from metabolic or congenital disorders that may influence growth, and/or limited the intake of certain foods, and/or suffered from any medical condition limiting or preventing their participation in normal physical activities were also excluded. When mothers had two or more children eligible to participate in the study, one of them was randomly chosen. Mothers completed the CFQ in either English or French, according to their preference. A total of 252 mothers participated in this study. Two hundred and twelve (n = 212) mothers were Black, among which one hundred and forty-one chose to complete the CFQ in French. A total of 5 mothers were excluded because they self-identified with more than one ethnicity, leaving 136 mothers for the current analyses.
The study was approved by the Office of Research Ethics and Integrity of the University of Ottawa (H-02-19-1405). Informed consent and assent were obtained from mothers and children, respectively.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Sociodemographic Characteristics

Mothers’ (i.e., age, migration status, length of time since immigration, education level, and marital status) and children’s (i.e., age and sex) socio-demographic characteristics were collected through a questionnaire administered to the mother by a trained research team member. Length of time since migration and age were calculated using the data collection date, along with the reported date of arrival in Canada and mothers’ and children’s dates of births, respectively.

2.2.2. Racial and Ethnic Identity

Ethnicity refers to the shared understanding of the historical and territorial origins of a population group as well as to a distinctive set of cultural similarities between people [46,47]. The latter concept is flexible and requires self-identification to one or more pre-established and/or self-perceived ethnic groups. In this study, ethnic identity was determined according to participants’ responses to the question: “With which racial or cultural group do you identify? You may belong to one or more racial or cultural groups on the following list: White, South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Arab, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean, Japanese, and Other”.

2.2.3. Weight Status

Mothers’ and children’s height (Charder HM200P Portstad portable stadiometer) and weight (LifeSource ProFit UC-321, A&D Medical digital scale) were measured by a registered dietitian or a trained dietetic student using the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines [48]. Mothers’ body mass index (BMI, weight (kg)/height (m)2) was calculated and classified according to the WHO’s BMI cut-offs [48]. The International Obesity Task Force (IOTF) references were used to calculate BMI-for-age-and-sex z-scores and define children’s weight status [49].

2.2.4. Maternal Feeding Practices, Perceptions, and Concerns about Child’s Weight

The CFQ was used to assess maternal feeding practices, perceptions, and concerns about child’s weight [25]. All of the CFQ’s subscales, subscales’ items, and answer scales are shown in Table 2. Three items of the PPW subscale and three items of the PCW subscale were dropped prior to the study in order to shorten the survey. Items assessing mothers’ perception of their weight during childhood (PPW1), adolescence (PPW2), and her twenties (PPW3) were dropped to shorten the questionnaire and due to the fact that an important proportion (94.1%) of Black mothers in this study were immigrants and thus spent part of their life in a Sub-Saharan African or Caribbean country, where rates of overweight and obesity were low. As there are important variations in body shape standards across cultures and because immigrant mothers came to Canada at different life stages, only mothers’ perception of their current body weight (PPW4) was assessed. As for the PCW subscale, items assessing parents’ perception of their child’s weight after kindergarten (PCW4–6) were dropped. As participating children were aged 6-to-12 years old, only items PCW1–PCW3 could be answered by all mothers, while items PCW4-PCW6 could only be answered by mothers with older children.
Table 2. English version and French translation of the Child Feeding Questionnaire.

2.3. Translation of the Child Feeding Questionnaire

The back-translation method with bilingual testing was used for translating into French the original English version of the CFQ [50]. Two bilingual (French-English) individuals whose first language was French individually completed the English-to-French translation of the CFQ. A panel composed of two bilingual co-investigators of the study compared, discussed, and modified translations to get the first complete French version of the questionnaire. Using the same approach, the French questionnaire was translated back into English by two bilingual individuals whose first language was English. The same panel compared the different English translations as well as the French and English translations, which led to a second version of the questionnaire in both languages. Both the English and the French versions of the questionnaire were tested among bilingual individuals of the target population before some final modifications were made. After the translation process, the response options “seldom”, “markedly underweight”, “markedly overweight”, and “unconcerned” of the original English version of the CFQ were replaced by “rarely”, “very underweight”, “very overweight”, and “not concerned”, respectively, to lower the language level as many participants had low English literacy. The English and the French versions of the questionnaire are presented in Table 2.

2.4. Statistics

2.4.1. Software and Packages

Data processing and statistical analyses were computed in R version 4.0.2 for (Mac) OS X [51]. Multivariate imputation via chained equations, item measures and reliability, and confirmatory factor analyses were computed using MICE [52], psych [53], and lavaan [54] packages.

2.4.2. Item Measures

All items’ and subscales’ mean, standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis measures were computed as indicators of data distribution. Floor and ceiling effects were assessed and reported when an item was rated with the lowest or highest possible score, respectively, by ≥50% of participants. Spearman’s ρ was computed to assess inter-item as indicators of item redundancy. Spearman’s ρ values ranging between 0.15 and 0.50 for inter-item correlations were considered acceptable [55,56].

2.4.3. Validity

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate the factor structure of the CFQ using maximum likelihood with robust standard error and a Santa–Bentler scaled test statistic (MLM) estimation [57]. MLM estimation was used as items evaluated on Likert-type scales can be seen as ordinal variables and may violate the assumption of multivariate normality [57]. The structures of all tested models are summarized in Table 3. Composite items present in some models were computed through averaging items scores (i.e., RST1a, RST1b, and RST1c into RST1; RST3a and RST3b into RST3; RST4a and RST4b into RST4).
Table 3. Fit indices.
The adequacy of models’ fit was assessed using the χ2 test, Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker–Lewis Fit Index (TLI), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR). The χ2 test compares the correlation matrix of the tested model to that estimated under the hypothesized (or “best fitting”) model or floor effects as well as high kurtosis and skewness values, which may have contributed to the low reliability of those subscales [58]. Small and non-significant χ2 values are indicative of small discrepancies between the observed data structure and the data structure of the hypothesized model [58]. AIC and BIC estimate the risk of under-fitting (AIC) and over-fitting (BIC) based on several parameters, including model complexity. Lower AIC and BIC values are associated with a lower risk of under-fitting and over-fitting, respectively [58,59,60]. CFI and TLI compare the tested model to a null (or “worst fitting”) model, with values ranging from 0.90 to 0.94 indicating an acceptable fit and values ≥ 0.95 indicating a good fit [58,61]. RMSEA compares the tested model to a reasonably fitted one, with values ranging from 0.06 to 0.08 indicating an acceptable fit and values < 0.06 indicating a good fit [58,61]. SRMR compares the tested model to a perfectly fitted one, with values nearing 0.08 indicating a good fit [58,61].

2.4.4. Reliability

Cronbach α and Macdonald’s ω were computed as estimates of subscales’ internal consistency [62,63,64]. Cronbach α and Macdonald’s ω if item deleted were also computed to identify any item that disproportionately impacted reliability estimates.

3. Results

3.1. Sample Characteristics

Mothers and children were aged 39.1 (SD: 5.9, range: 28–54) and 8.8 (SD: 2.0, range: 6–12) years, respectively. A majority of mothers were foreign-born (94.1%), had a partner at the time of the study (66.2%), and obtained at least a college certificate or diploma (88.9%). Migrant mothers had been living in Canada for an average of 8.8 (SD: 8.1, range: 0.03–38.6) years. Overweight and obesity prevalence was high in both mothers (82.3%) and children (35.1%). Mothers’ and children’s characteristics are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Mothers’ and children’s characteristics.

3.2. Item Measures

Items’ and subscales’ mean, standard deviation, distribution, and reliability estimates are shown in Table 5. There were less than 1% missing data. Skewness values were acceptable (skew = −1.82–1.17) for the large majority of items and subscales, with only the PR3 item being negatively skewed (skew = −2.27). Several items (PR1, PR3, PCW1–3, RST1, PE2) and one subscale (PCW) had a leptokurtic distribution, as indicated by kurtosis values > 2.0. All high kurtosis values were positive, which is consistent with the fact that ceiling effects were observed for seven items; six items (PR1, PR3, RST1, RST2, RST4, PE4) were rated with the highest possible score by 50–74% of participants, and one item (PE2) was rated with the highest possible score by ≥75% participants. Floor effects were observed for CCW1 and CCW2, with these items being rated with the lowest possible score by 50–55% of participants.
Table 5. Item and reliability measures.

3.3. Validity

Fit indices for all tested models are shown in Table 3. Out of the nine tested models, three (model 3, model 6, and model 9) had an acceptable fit as indicated by non-significant χ2 statistic, CFI ≥ 0.95, TLI ≥ 0.95, RMSEA ≤ 0.05, and SRMR ≤ 0.08. Of these three acceptable models, model 6 (see Figure 1) was retained as the final model as it (1) excluded two items with very low factor loadings; (2) had the lowest χ2, AIC, BIC, RMSEA, and SRMR values; and (3) had CFI and TLI values ≥ 0.95. The final model, presented in Figure 1, included 7 factors, 20 items, and 1 error covariance between PCW1 and PCW2. All factor loadings were significantly different from 0 and were ≥0.30 (see Table 6), inter-item correlations ranged from 0.10 to 0.50, and inter-factor correlations ranged from 0.001 to 0.613. There were several significant inter-factor correlations. MN was positively correlated with PR (r = 0.37, p < 0.05), CCW (r = 0.28, p < 0.01), RST (r = 0.61, p < 0.01), and PE (r = 0.33, p < 0.01), while PE was positively correlated with PR (r = 0.28, p < 0.05) and RST (r = 0.36, p < 0.01) and negatively correlated with PPW (r = −0.26, p < 0.05).
Figure 1. Model 6 factorial structure. CCW: Concern about Child’s Weight; MN: Monitoring; PCW: Perceived Child Weight; PE: Pressure to Eat; PPW: Perceived Parent Weight; PR: Perceived Responsibility; RST: Restriction.
Table 6. Standardized factor loadings and subscales’ factor–factor correlations.

3.4. Reliability

With the final model’s (model 6) structure, internal consistency ranged from poor (Cronbach α = 0.53, Macdonald’s ω = 0.60) to good (Cronbach α = 0.80, Macdonald’s ω = 0.82) (see Table 4). The RST subscale had the lowest internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.53, Macdonald’s ω = 0.53), followed by the PR (Cronbach α = 0.57, Macdonald’s ω = 0.60), PE (Cronbach α = 0.64, Macdonald’s ω = 0.70), PCW (Cronbach α = 0.68, Macdonald’s ω = 0.78), CCW (Cronbach α = 0.79, Macdonald’s ω = 0.79), and MN (Cronbach α = 0.80, Macdonald’s ω = 0.82) scales, respectively. Removing any of the three items of model 6’s RST subscale did not increase internal consistency. Including the composite item RST3 in the RST subscale was associated with a slightly poorer internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.51, Macdonald’s ω = 0.57). On the contrary, models without composite items on the RST scale had higher internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.66, Macdonald’s ω = 0.79). Similar to the RST scale, removing any item from the PR subscale did not improve internal consistency. For the two subscales with an acceptable internal consistency, removing an item increased Cronbach α values. Removing item PE1 from the PE subscale increased the Cronbach α value from 0.64 to 0.70, and removing item PCW3 from the PCW subscale increased the Cronbach α value from 0.68 to 0.73. The RW subscale that was only included in models 7, 8, and 9 had poor internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.32, Macdonald’s ω = 0.60).

4. Discussion

This study aimed to develop a French version of the CFQ and to assess its construct validity and reliability in a sample of Black mothers of 6-to-12-year-old children living in Canada. In addition to the English-to-French translation, six items (PPW1–3, PCW3–6) were removed from the original version of the CFQ prior to its administration. Based on previous validation studies, several CFQ structures were tested, among which a seven-factor model, with minor modifications, was found to have the best fit to the current data. Most modifications made to the questionnaire’s structure involved the RST subscale, whose construct limitations were highlighted in several previous studies. Except for RST and PR, all subscales had at least an acceptable level of reliability.
Similar to Schmidt et al. (2017), item analyses revealed a low number of missing data indicating that, when translated into French, the questionnaire was comprehensible overall and well-accepted by the mothers. A leptokurtic distribution and ceiling effects were noted for several items, namely, items of the PR, RST, and PE scales. While floor and ceiling effects are more likely to be observed in population-based samples [34,65], these findings raise concerns over the sensitivity of some factors of the CFQ. Since only Schmidt et al. (2017) have reported item measures, additional studies doing so are needed in order to adequately document the sensitivity of the CFQ in various population-based and clinical (e.g., treatment-seeking) samples.
In the present study, modifications made to the questionnaire during the validation process reflected previously encountered challenges. The factor causing the most problems in all validation studies is RST. While most of the items loaded as predicted and had acceptable loading factors, the composite item “food as reward” loaded poorly on the RST subscale. In the large majority of previous validation studies, these two items were either dropped [9,31,36] or used to create a new subscale entitled “food as reward” [26,32,34]. Here, we tested both approaches and retained the model in which the two RST items were dropped (Model 6, Table 3) rather than the eight-factor model (Model 9, Table 3). While both models had an acceptable construct, the retained model had better fit indices. Overall, the final model’s fit indices were better than those reported in previous studies (see Table 1 for a summary of previous studies’ fit indices).
Another problematic factor was PCW, which had high inter-item correlations. As previously pointed out, the repetitive nature of the questions combined with a relatively short age span may have led to strong correlations between PCW items [31,36]. To address this issue, we included one error covariance between PCW1 and PCW2 in the final model. Most previous studies, including Birch et al. (2001), also included error covariances between items of the PCW subscale in their final model to address this problem [25,31,33,34,36].
Our results showed that PCW, CCW, PE, and MN subscales had good or acceptable reliability, while PR and RST subscales had low reliability. Both the PR and the RST subscale included several items with either ceiling or floor effects as well as high kurtosis and skewness values, which may have contributed to the low reliability of those subscales [63,64]. Overall, reliability was weaker than in previous studies, which may partly be explained via differences in sample sizes. Larger sample sizes and continuous data allow for a more valid estimate of reliability [62,63,64].
This is the first study to assess the reliability and construct validity of a French translation of the CFQ. The results of this study should be considered in light of several limitations. This study was conducted in a relatively small sample size of Black mothers of 6-to-12-year-old children living in Ottawa, which limits its generalizability to other racial and ethnic groups as well as to Black mothers living outside Ottawa. Another limitation of the present study is the fact that only one item from the PPW subscale was included in the questionnaire administered in the present study. Previous studies have reported high correlations between PPW items, which affect the fit indicators of the tool. The absence of these factors may have contributed to improving the fit indicators in this study. Future studies are needed to test the validity and reliability of the questionnaire among fathers, among individuals from other racial and ethnic groups, as well as among individuals living in different regions of Canada.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.B. and I.G.; methodology, R.B., I.G. and A.M.B.; software, A.M.B.; validation, C.-C.K., R.B. and A.M.B.; formal analysis, A.M.B.; investigation, R.B.; resources, I.G.; data curation, C.-C.K., R.B. and A.M.B.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.B.; writing—review and editing, C.-C.K., R.B. and I.G.; visualization, A.M.B.; supervision, R.B. and I.G.; project administration, R.B. and I.G.; funding acquisition, R.B. and I.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Consortium national de formation en santé—Volet Université d’Ottawa, grant number 129222, 2013–2014; 131261, 2014–2015; 152192, 2019.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the University of Ottawa Research Ethics Board (H-02-19-1405).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy restrictions.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank mothers and their children for their time and personal contribution to this study as well as community partners, organizations, and individuals for their support and help during the recruitment.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rao, D.P.; Kropac, E.; Do, M.T.; Roberts, K.C.; Jayaraman, G.C. Childhood Overweight and Obesity Trends in Canada. Health Promot. Chronic Dis. Prev. Can. 2016, 36, 194–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. World Health Organization. Why Does Childhood Overweight and Obesity Matter? Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight (accessed on 14 May 2019).
  3. Valera, B.; Sohani, Z.; Rana, A.; Poirier, P.; Anand, S.S. The Ethnoepidemiology of Obesity. Can. J. Cardiol. 2015, 31, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Arroyo-Johnson, C.; Mincey, K.D. Obesity Epidemiology Worldwide. Gastroenterol. Clin. N. Am. 2016, 45, 571–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Tremblay, M.; Pérez, C.; Ardern, C.; Bryan, S.; Katzmarzyk, P. Obesity, Overweight and Ethnicity. Health Rep. 2005, 16, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Shields, M. Overweight and Obesity among Children and Youth. Health Rep. 2006, 17, 27–42. [Google Scholar]
  7. Kumar, S.; Kelly, A.S. Review of Childhood Obesity: From Epidemiology, Etiology, and Comorbidities to Clinical Assessment and Treatment. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2017, 92, 251–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rodd, C.; Sharma, A.K. Prevalence of Overweight and Obesity in Canadian Children, 2004 to 2013: Impact of Socioeconomic Determinants. Paediatr. Child. Health 2017, 22, 153–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Anderson, C.B.; Hughes, S.O.; Fisher, J.O.; Nicklas, T.A. Cross-Cultural Equivalence of Feeding Beliefs and Practices: The Psychometric Properties of the Child Feeding Questionnaire among Blacks and Hispanics. Prev. Med. 2005, 41, 521–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Birch, L.; Fisher, J. Development of Eating Behaviors among Children and Adolescents. Pediatrics 1998, 101, S539–S549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Rosenkranz, R.R.; Dzewaltowski, D.A. Model of the Home Food Environment Pertaining to Childhood Obesity. Nutr. Rev. 2008, 66, 123–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Birch, L.L.; Fisher, J.O. Mothers’ Child-Feeding Practices Influence Daughters’ Eating and Weight. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2000, 71, 1054–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Spruijt-Metz, D.; Lindquist, C.H.; Birch, L.L.; Fisher, J.O.; Goran, M.I. Relation between Mothers’ Child-Feeding Practices and Children’s Adiposity. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2002, 75, 581–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Tschann, J.M.; Martinez, S.M.; Penilla, C.; Gregorich, S.E.; Pasch, L.A.; de Groat, C.L.; Flores, E.; Deardorff, J.; Greenspan, L.C.; Butte, N.F. Parental Feeding Practices and Child Weight Status in Mexican American Families: A Longitudinal Analysis. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2015, 12, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Papaioannou, M.A.; Power, T.G.; O’Connor, T.M.; Fisher, J.O.; Micheli, N.E.; Hughes, S.O. Child Weight Status: The Role of Feeding Styles and Highly Motivated Eating in Children. Children 2023, 10, 507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Faith, M.S.; Scanlon, K.S.; Birch, L.L.; Francis, L.A.; Sherry, B. Parent-Child Feeding Strategies and Their Relationships to Child Eating and Weight Status. Obes. Res. 2004, 12, 1711–1722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shloim, N.; Edelson, L.R.; Martin, N.; Hetherington, M.M. Parenting Styles, Feeding Styles, Feeding Practices, and Weight Status in 4–12 Year-Old Children: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kengneson, C.C.; Blanchet, R.; Sanou, D.; Batal, M.; Giroux, I. Factors Associated with Feeding Practices of Black Immigrant Mothers of African and Caribbean Origin Living in Ottawa, Canada. Appetite 2021, 167, 105641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gerards, S.M.P.L.; Gubbels, J.S.; Dagnelie, P.C.; Kremers, S.P.J.; Stafleu, A.; De Vries, N.K.; Thijs, C. Parental Perception of Child’s Weight Status and Subsequent BMIz Change: The KOALA Birth Cohort Study. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Robinson, E.; Sutin, A.R. Parental Perception of Weight Status and Weight Gain across Childhood. Pediatrics 2016, 137, e20153957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Robinson, E.; Sutin, A.R. Parents’ Perceptions of Their Children as Overweight and Children’s Weight Concerns and Weight Gain. Psychol. Sci. 2017, 28, 320–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. de Lauzon-Guillain, B.; Oliveira, A.; Charles, M.A.; Grammatikaki, E.; Jones, L.; Rigal, N.; Lopes, C.; Manios, Y.; Moreira, P.; Emmett, P.; et al. A Review of Methods to Assess Parental Feeding Practices and Preschool Children’s Eating Behavior: The Need for Further Development of Tools. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2012, 112, 1578–1602.e8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Musher-Eizenman, D.R.; Kiefner, A. Food Parenting: A Selective Review of Current Measurement and an Empirical Examination to Inform Future Measurement. Child. Obes. 2013, 9, S32–S39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Vaughn, A.E.; Tabak, R.G.; Bryant, M.J.; Ward, D.S. Measuring Parent Food Practices: A Systematic Review of Existing Measures and Examination of Instruments. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2013, 10, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Birch, L.; Fisher, J.; Grimm-Thomas, K.; Markey, C.; Sawyer, R.; Johnson, S. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Child Feeding Questionnaire: A Measure of Parental Attitudes, Beliefs and Practices about Child Feeding and Obesity Proneness. Appetite 2001, 36, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Kong, A.; Vijayasiri, G.; Fitzgibbon, M.L.; Schiffer, L.A.; Campbell, R.T. Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Measurement Invariance of the Child Feeding Questionnaire in Low-Income Hispanic and African-American Mothers with Preschool-Age Children. Appetite 2015, 90, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Boles, R.E.; Nelson, T.D.; Chamberlin, L.A.; Valenzuela, J.M.; Sherman, S.N.; Johnson, S.L.; Powers, S.W. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Child Feeding Questionnaire among Low-Income African American Families of Preschool Children. Appetite 2010, 54, 402–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Corsini, N.; Danthiir, V.; Kettler, L.; Wilson, C. Factor Structure and Psychometric Properties of the Child Feeding Questionnaire in Australian Preschool Children. Appetite 2008, 51, 474–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Geng, G.; Zhu, Z.; Suzuki, K.; Tanaka, T.; Ando, D.; Sato, M.; Yamagata, Z. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) in Japanese Elementary School Children. Appetite 2009, 52, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Camcı, N.; Bas, M.; Buyukkaragoz, A.H. The Psychometric Properties of the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ) in Turkey. Appetite 2014, 78, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nowicka, P.; Sorjonen, K.; Pietrobelli, A.; Flodmark, C.-E.; Faith, M.S. Parental Feeding Practices and Associations with Child Weight Status. Swedish Validation of the Child Feeding Questionnaire Finds Parents of 4-Year-Olds Less Restrictive. Appetite 2014, 81, 232–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Liu, W.-H.; Mallan, K.M.; Mihrshahi, S.; Daniels, L.A. Feeding Beliefs and Practices of Chinese Immigrant Mothers. Validation of a Modified Version of the Child Feeding Questionnaire. Appetite 2014, 80, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Canals-Sans, J.; Blanco-Gómez, A.; Luque, V.; Ferré, N.; Ferrando, P.J.; Gispert-Llauradó, M.; Escribano, J.; Closa-Monasterolo, R. Validation of the Child Feeding Questionnaire in Spanish Parents of Schoolchildren. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2016, 48, 383–391.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Schmidt, R.; Richter, R.; Brauhardt, A.; Hiemisch, A.; Kiess, W.; Hilbert, A. Parental Feeding Practices in Families with Children Aged 2–13 Years: Psychometric Properties and Child Age-Specific Norms of the German Version of the Child Feeding Questionnaire (CFQ). Appetite 2017, 109, 154–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mosli, R.H. Validation of the Child Feeding Questionnaire among Saudi Pre-Schoolers in Jeddah City. Public Health Nutr. 2020, 23, 599–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kaur, H.; Li, C.; Nazir, N.; Choi, W.S.; Resnicow, K.; Birch, L.L.; Ahluwalia, J.S. Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Child-Feeding Questionnaire among Parents of Adolescents. Appetite 2006, 47, 36–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Baranowski, T.; O’Connor, T.; Hughes, S.; Sleddens, E.; Beltran, A.; Frankel, L.; Mendoza, J.A.; Baranowski, J. Houston … We Have a Problem! Measurement of Parenting. Child. Obes. 2013, 9, S1–S4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Shea, C.; Dwyer, J.; Heeney, E.; Goy, R.; Simpson, J. The Effect of Parental Feeding Behaviours and Participation of Children in Organized Sports/Activities on Child Body Mass Index. Can. J. Diet. Pract. Res. 2010, 71, e87–e93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tremblay, L.; Rinaldi, C.M.; Lovsin, T.; Zecevic, C. Parents’ Perceptions of Children’s Weight: The Accuracy of Ratings and Associations to Strategies for Feeding. Early Child. Dev. Care 2012, 182, 1027–1040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Walton, K.; Filion, A.J.; Gross, D.; Morrongiello, B.; Darlington, G.; Simpson, J.R.; Hou, S.; Haines, J. Parents and Tots Together: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of a Family-Based Obesity Prevention Intervention in Canada. Can. J. Public Health 2015, 106, e555–e562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Blanchet, R.; Sanou, D.; Nana, C.P.; Pauzé, E.; Batal, M.; Giroux, I. Strategies and Challenges in Recruiting Black Immigrant Mothers for a Community-Based Study on Child Nutritional Health in Ottawa, Canada. J. Immigr. Minor. Health 2017, 19, 367–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Blanchet, R.; Sanou, D.; Batal, M.; Nana, C.P.; Giroux, I. Draw and Tell: Dietary Acculturation as Lived by Black Immigrant Children of African and Caribbean Descent Residing in Canada. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2017, 49, 838–846.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Blanchet, R.; Nana, C.P.; Sanou, D.; Batal, M.; Giroux, I. Dietary Acculturation among Black Immigrant Families Living in Ottawa—A Qualitative Study. Ecol. Food Nutr. 2018, 57, 223–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Tarraf, D.; Sanou, D.; Blanchet, R.; Nana, C.P.; Batal, M.; Giroux, I. Prevalence and Determinants of Food Insecurity in Migrant Sub-Saharan African and Caribbean Households in Ottawa, Canada. Int. J. Migr. Health Soc. Care 2018, 14, 160–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kengneson, C.C.; Blanchet, R.; Sanou, D.; Batal, M.; Phillips, K.P.; Giroux, I. Maternal Perceptions and Concerns about Children’s Weight Status and Diet Quality: A Study among Black Immigrant Families. Public Health Nutr. 2022, 25, 2232–2245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Statistics Canada Ethnic Origin of Person. Available online: http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p3Var.pl?Function=DEC&Id=103475 (accessed on 9 June 2019).
  47. United Nations’ Department of Economic and Social Affairs—Statistics Division. Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses—Revision 3, 3rd ed.; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2017; ISBN 9789211615975. [Google Scholar]
  48. World Health Organization. Physical Status: The Use and Interpretation of Anthropometry; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  49. Cole, T.J.; Lobstein, T. Extended International (IOTF) Body Mass Index Cut-Offs for Thinness, Overweight and Obesity. Pediatr. Obes. 2012, 7, 284–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Maneesriwongul, W.; Dixon, J.K. Instrument Translation Process: A Methods Review. J. Adv. Nurs. 2004, 48, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. R Core Team. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2020. Available online: https://www.r-project.org/ (accessed on 9 June 2019).
  52. van Buuren, S.; Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. Mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R. J. Stat. Softw. 2011, 45, 1–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Revelle, W. Package “Psych”: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. 2019. Available online: https://personality-project.org/r/psych-manual.pdf (accessed on 9 June 2019).
  54. Rosseel, Y. Lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 2012, 48, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Aylward, G.; Stancin, T. Screening and Assessment Tools. In Developmental-Behavioral Pediatrics; Mosby: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2008; pp. 123–201. ISBN 978-0-323-04025-9. [Google Scholar]
  56. Field, A. Exploratory Factor Analysis. In Discovering Statistics Using. SPSS; SAGE Publications Inc.: Chennai, India, 2009; pp. 673–685. ISBN 978-1-84787-906-6. [Google Scholar]
  57. Heck, R.H.; Thomas, S.L. An Introduction to Multilevel Modeling Techniques: MLM and SEM Approaches, 4th ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2020; ISBN 9780429060274. [Google Scholar]
  58. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Akaike, H. Factor Analysis and AIC. Psychometrika 1987, 52, 317–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Vrieze, S.I. Model Selection and Psychological Theory: A Discussion of the Differences between the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). Psychol. Methods 2012, 17, 228–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Bentler, P.M. Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models. Psychol. Bull. 1990, 107, 238–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Cronbach, L.J. Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika 1951, 16, 297–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Dunn, T.J.; Baguley, T.; Brunsden, V. From Alpha to Omega: A Practical Solution to the Pervasive Problem of Internal Consistency Estimation. Br. J. Psychol. 2014, 105, 399–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Trizano-Hermosilla, I.; Alvarado, J.M. Best Alternatives to Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability in Realistic Conditions: Congeneric and Asymmetrical Measurements. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Varni, J.W.; Limbers, C.A.; Burwinkle, T.M. Parent Proxy-Report of Their Children’s Health-Related Quality of Life: An Analysis of 13,878 Parents’ Reliability and Validity across Age Subgroups Using the PedsQLTM 4.0 Generic Core Scales. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 2007, 5, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Factors Influencing Participation in Physical Activity, Sports, and Exercise in Children and Adolescents with Spinal Pain or Spinal Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Ethnography
Previous
Dual-Task Performance, Balance and Aerobic Capacity as Predictors of Falls in Older Adults with Cardiovascular Disease: A Comparative Study
Next