Baby's first bites: Association between observed maternal feeding behavior and infant vegetable intake and liking.

Positive experiences with the introduction of solid food in infancy may lead to positive associations with feeding in both parent and infant. During this transitional period, parental feeding behavior and infant eating behavior might mutually reinforce each other. A feeding style that is found to be associated with positive child eating behavior, is sensitive feeding. In the present study we tested bidirectional prospective relations between mother and infant behavior in a cross-lagged model using observations of two feeds on two consecutive days on which the first bites of solid food were offered. The sample consisted of 246 first-time mothers and their infants, whose feeding interactions were videotaped during two home visits. Maternal sensitive feeding behavior (consisting of responsiveness to child feeding cues, general sensitivity and non-intrusiveness) and maternal positive and negative affect were coded. In addition, infant vegetable intake was weighed and vegetable liking was reported by mother. Results showed at least some stability of maternal feeding behavior and infant vegetable intake and liking from the first to the second feed. In addition, during the second feed maternal sensitive feeding and positive affect were associated with infant vegetable intake (r=.34 and r=.14) and liking (r=.33 and r=.39). These associations were mostly absent during the first feed. Finally, infant vegetable liking during the first feed positively predicted maternal sensitive feeding behavior during the second feed (ß=.25), suggesting that the infant's first response might influence maternal behavior. Taken together, mother and infant seem more attuned during the second feed than during the first feed. Future studies might include multiple observations over a longer time period, or micro-coding. Such insights can inform prevention programs focusing on optimizing feeding experiences during the weaning period.

Coded diagnoses from general practice electronic health records are a feasible and valid alternative to self-report to define diabetes cases in research.

AIMS: To examine the feasibility and validity of obtaining International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC)-coded diagnoses of diabetes mellitus (DM) from general practice electronic health records for case definition in epidemiological studies, as alternatives to self-reported DM. METHODS: The Netherlands Epidemiology of Obesity study is a population-based cohort study of 6671 persons aged 45-65 years at baseline, included between 2008-2012. Data from electronic health records were collected between 2012-2014. We defined a reference standard using diagnoses, prescriptions and consultation notes and investigated its agreement with ICPC-coded diagnoses of DM and self-reported DM. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 1.8 years, data from 6442 (97%) participants were collected. With the reference standard, 506 participants (79/1000 person-years) were classified with prevalent DM at baseline and 131 participants (11/1000 person-years) were classified with incident DM during follow-up. The agreement of prevalent DM between self-report and the reference standard was 98% (kappa 0.86), the agreement between ICPC-coded diagnoses and the reference standard was 99% (kappa 0.95). The agreement of incident DM between ICPC-coded diagnoses and the reference standard was >99% (kappa 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: ICPC-coded diagnoses of DM from general practice electronic health records are a feasible and valid alternative to self-reported diagnoses of DM.

Expectations about the effectiveness of pain- and itch-relieving medication administered via different routes.

BACKGROUND: Placebo effects on pain have been found to vary in size for different routes of medication administration (e.g. oral vs. injection). This has important implications for both clinical research and practice. To enhance our understanding of these differential placebo effects, research on the underlying expectations about multiple routes and symptoms other than pain is vital. METHODS: A cross-sectional, Internet-based survey was conducted in a representative sample of the Dutch population (n = 508). Respondents rated the expected effectiveness of pain- and itch-relieving medication in six forms, representing oral, injection and topical routes of administration. RESULTS: Injected medication was expected to be most effective for relieving pain, and topical medication for relieving itch. Furthermore, exploratory analyses showed that injections were expected to have the most rapid onset and long-lasting effects, and to be most frightening and expensive, while topical medication was expected to be the safest and the easiest to use, and oral medication was expected to have the most side effects. Higher expected effectiveness was moderately associated with expectations of more rapid onset and long-lasting effects, and better safety and ease of use. Associations of expected effectiveness with respondent characteristics (e.g. medication use and personality characteristics) were statistically small or nonsignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Expected effectiveness of medication differed depending on route of administration and targeted symptom. These findings have important implications for the design and interpretation of clinical trials and suggest that medication effects might be enhanced by prescribing medicine via the route that patients expect to be most effective for their complaint. SIGNIFICANCE: Differences in the expected effectiveness of medication depend on the route of administration (oral, injection, topical) and targeted symptom (pain, itch). These findings have important implications for clinical practice and the design and interpretation of clinical trials.