Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding: Overweight/obesity risk
- Population
- Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries
- Intervention
- Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF)
- Comparison
- Other models of complementary feeding
- Outcome
- Overweight/obesity risk
NRCF showed no significant association with overweight/obesity across the reported comparisons (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding Overweight and obesity · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries · 15–20 months, Outpatient, observational NRCF showed no significant association with overweight/obesity across the reported comparisons (very low certainty). Complementary Feeding Caregivers' Practices and Growth, Risk of Overweight/Obesity, and Other… (2022) All outcomes | No significant association for all comparisons for documented exposures of at least 6 months; 4 observational studies; Very low certainty. | 4 studies | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complementary Feeding Caregivers' Practices and Growth, Risk of Overweight/Obesity, and Other Non-Communicable Diseases: A Systematic… 2022 All outcomes | Updated to September 2021 | 24 | Low / Critically Low |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or… · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.