Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Convergent validity of PCFP subscales with nutritional status in Study 2

From: Validation of a measurement instrument for parental child feeding in a low and middle-income country

  Child nutritional statusc
UW Mean (SD) NW Mean (SD) OW Mean (SD) p-value
PR 3.88 (0.58) 3.87 (0.58) 3.90 (0.61) 0.98
PPW 3.03 (0.42) 3.09 (0.40) 3.26 (0.48) 0.06
PCWa 2.93 (0.34) 3.07 (0.27) 3.53 (0.42) 0.01b**
CN 2.67 (1.05) 3.12 (0.98) 2.93 (0.85) 0.01b**
FR 2.59 (0.74) 2.68 (0.76) 2.82 (0.63) 0.42
M 3.74 (0.74) 3.60 (0.83) 3.76 (0.63) 0.35
PE 3.81 (0.89) 3.74 (0.87) 3.99 (0.80) 0.51**
RH 4.13 (0.81) 4.01 (1.01) 4.16 (0.90) 0.83**
CC 3.05 (0.60) 2.88 (0.58) 3.11 (0.58) 0.06
ER 2.99 (0.72) 2.92 (0.81) 2.75 (0.64) 0.44
  1. UW Underweight, NW Normal weight, OW Overweight
  2. **p-value from Kruskal-Wallis test (mean score is not normally distributed)
  3. aPCW 1–4
  4. bsignificant mean difference (p < .05)
  5. cCategories of child nutritional status according to the international (IOTF) childhood BMI cut-offs for overweight, obesity and thinness [31] were regrouped