PRISMA-P 2015 Checklist.

Obesity in children is a major public health concern due to the increased risk of developing adverse health outcomes in their future, and disability in adulthood. The existing systematic reviews on the topic are limited in scope, focusing solely on high-income countries and children aged 4–12 years. Hence, we propose to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to understand, how exposure to authoritative feeding style versus authoritarian, indulgent, uninvolved compare in terms of its association with adiposity in children aged 6 months to 5 years. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines were followed for ensuring the completeness of the protocol. Case-control and cohort studies will be included. Searches will be done using electronic databases viz. PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Grey literature will be searched using OpenGrey and Grey Literature Report. We will only include quantitative studies using the developed search strategy. For categorical outcomes, relative risks, odds ratios, and hazard ratios with confidence intervals and for continuous outcomes mean difference with confidence intervals will be used. Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies- of Exposure (ROBINS-E) will be used for the evaluation of risk of bias in the individual observational studies. Considering the inherent variability in the observational studies, random effects meta-analysis will also be conducted. If between-study heterogeneity exists, a subgroup analysis based on low and middle-income countries vs. high income countries will be conducted. If the data is not suitable for combining quantitatively, a narrative synthesis will be undertaken. We propose to identify publication bias by using contour-enhanced funnel plots and “trim and fill” method. Outcome reporting bias will be ascertained by comparing the outcomes published in the protocol and the published report. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system will be used to understand the confidence we can have on the effect estimates.Registration: This protocol has been registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 13 March 2023 with registration number CRD42023356014.</div

PubMed search strategy.

Obesity in children is a major public health concern due to the increased risk of developing adverse health outcomes in their future, and disability in adulthood. The existing systematic reviews on the topic are limited in scope, focusing solely on high-income countries and children aged 4–12 years. Hence, we propose to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to understand, how exposure to authoritative feeding style versus authoritarian, indulgent, uninvolved compare in terms of its association with adiposity in children aged 6 months to 5 years. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines were followed for ensuring the completeness of the protocol. Case-control and cohort studies will be included. Searches will be done using electronic databases viz. PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Grey literature will be searched using OpenGrey and Grey Literature Report. We will only include quantitative studies using the developed search strategy. For categorical outcomes, relative risks, odds ratios, and hazard ratios with confidence intervals and for continuous outcomes mean difference with confidence intervals will be used. Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies- of Exposure (ROBINS-E) will be used for the evaluation of risk of bias in the individual observational studies. Considering the inherent variability in the observational studies, random effects meta-analysis will also be conducted. If between-study heterogeneity exists, a subgroup analysis based on low and middle-income countries vs. high income countries will be conducted. If the data is not suitable for combining quantitatively, a narrative synthesis will be undertaken. We propose to identify publication bias by using contour-enhanced funnel plots and “trim and fill” method. Outcome reporting bias will be ascertained by comparing the outcomes published in the protocol and the published report. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system will be used to understand the confidence we can have on the effect estimates.Registration: This protocol has been registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 13 March 2023 with registration number CRD42023356014.</div

A Disease Model for Wheezing Disorders in Preschool Children Based on Clinicians' Perceptions

Background: Wheezing disorders in childhood vary widely in clinical presentation and disease course. During the last years, several ways to classify wheezing children into different disease phenotypes have been proposed and are increasingly used for clinical guidance, but validation of these hypothetical entities is difficult. Methodology/Principal Findings: The aim of this study was to develop a testable disease model which reflects the full spectrum of wheezing illness in preschool children. We performed a qualitative study among a panel of 7 experienced clinicians from 4 European countries working in primary, secondary and tertiary paediatric care. In a series of questionnaire surveys and structured discussions, we found a general consensus that preschool wheezing disorders consist of several phenotypes, with a great heterogeneity of specific disease concepts between clinicians. Initially, 24 disease entities were described among the 7 physicians. In structured discussions, these could be narrowed down to three entities which were linked to proposed mechanisms: a) allergic wheeze, b) non-allergic wheeze due to structural airway narrowing and c) non-allergic wheeze due to increased immune response to viral infections. This disease model will serve to create an artificial dataset that allows the validation of data-driven multidimensional methods, such as cluster analysis, which have been proposed for identification of wheezing phenotypes in children. Conclusions/Significance: While there appears to be wide agreement among clinicians that wheezing disorders consist of several diseases, there is less agreement regarding their number and nature. A great diversity of disease concepts exist but a unified phenotype classification reflecting underlying disease mechanisms is lacking. We propose a disease model which may help guide future research so that proposed mechanisms are measured at the right time and their role in disease heterogeneity can be studied