Next Article in Journal
Comparable Analysis of Acute Changes in Vascular Tone after Coffee versus Energy Drink Consumption
Next Article in Special Issue
Adolescent Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices of Healthy Eating: Findings of Qualitative Interviews among Hong Kong Families
Previous Article in Journal
The Relationship between Fluid Milk, Water, and 100% Juice and Health Outcomes among Children and Adolescents
 
 
Systematic Review
Peer-Review Record

Bidirectional Associations between Parental Non-Responsive Feeding Practices and Child Eating Behaviors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Prospective Studies

Nutrients 2022, 14(9), 1896; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14091896
by Jian Wang 1,2, Bingqian Zhu 1, Ruxing Wu 1, Yan-Shing Chang 2, Yang Cao 3,* and Daqiao Zhu 1,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nutrients 2022, 14(9), 1896; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14091896
Submission received: 31 March 2022 / Revised: 22 April 2022 / Accepted: 28 April 2022 / Published: 30 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Effect of Food Environment, Eating Behavior and Pediatric Health)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a well-written paper. The method used for analysis is clear. The results and discussion focus primarily on definitive findings for rewarding with food and food responsiveness. It might be helpful, though perhaps not critical to the paper, to address their report of mixed findings related to other bi-directional characteristics that were weak or did not exist.

 

Edit text for errors in sentence structure or missing words.

Well-written literature review and methodology sections.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

In my opinion the manuscript entitled "Bidirectional associations between parental non-responsive feeding practices and child eating behaviors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal prospective studies" presents an analysis of an interesting issue regarding the nutrition of children, but I have doubts whether it can be accepted for publication in the current version. It seems that the number of scientific studies that have been included in this meta-analysis is too small for the inference to be reliable, as Authors of the manuscript also write about. On the other hand, Authors performed the meta-analysis correctly and indicated the limitations of the study. My only objection concerns the figures that are hardly legible.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop