↓ Skip to main content

Effects of total fat intake on bodyweight in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
61 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of total fat intake on bodyweight in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012960
Pubmed ID
Authors

Celeste E Naude, Marianne E Visser, Kim A Nguyen, Solange Durao, Anel Schoonees

Abstract

As part of efforts to prevent childhood overweight and obesity, we need to understand the relationship between total fat intake and body fatness in generally healthy children. To assess the effects of total fat intake on measures of weight and body fatness in children and young people not aiming to lose weight. For this update we revised the previous search strategy and ran it over all years in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), MEDLINE (PubMed), and Embase (Ovid) (current to 23 May 2017). No language and publication status limits were applied. We searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing and unpublished studies (5 June 2017). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children aged 24 months to 18 years, with or without risk factors for cardiovascular disease, randomised to a lower fat (30% or less of total energy (TE)) versus usual or moderate-fat diet (greater than 30%TE), without the intention to reduce weight, and assessed a measure of weight or body fatness after at least six months. We included prospective analytical cohort studies in these children if they related baseline total fat intake to weight or body fatness at least 12 months later. We duplicated inclusion decisions and resolved disagreement by discussion with other authors. We extracted data on participants, interventions or exposures, controls and outcomes, and trial or cohort quality characteristics, as well as data on potential effect modifiers, and assessed risk of bias for all included studies. We extracted outcome data using the following time point ranges, when available: RCTs: baseline to six months, six to 12 months, one to two years, two to five years and more than five years; cohort studies: baseline to one year, one to two years, two to five years, five to 10 years and more than 10 years. We planned to perform random-effects meta-analyses with relevant subgrouping, and sensitivity and funnel plot analyses where data allowed. We included 24 studies comprising three parallel-group RCTs (n = 1054 randomised) and 21 prospective analytical cohort studies (about 25,059 children completed). Twenty-three were conducted in high-income countries. No meta-analyses were possible, since only one RCT reported the same outcome at each time point range for all outcomes, and cohort studies were too heterogeneous.For the RCTs, concerns about imprecision and poor reporting limited our confidence in our findings. In addition, the inclusion of hypercholesteraemic children in two trials raised concerns about applicability. Lower versus usual or modified total fat intake may have made little or no difference to weight over a six- to twelve month period (mean difference (MD) -0.50 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.78 to 0.78; 1 RCT; n = 620; low-quality evidence), nor a two- to five-year period (MD -0.60 kg, 95% CI -2.39 to 1.19; 1 RCT; n = 612; low-quality evidence). Compared to controls, lower total fat intake (30% or less TE) probably decreased BMI in children over a one- to two-year period (MD -1.5 kg/m2, 95% CI -2.45 to -0.55; 1 RCT; n = 191; moderate-quality evidence), with no other differences evident across the other time points (two to five years: MD 0.00 kg/m2, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.63; 1 RCT; n = 541; greater than five years; MD -0.10 kg/m2, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.55; 1 RCT; n = 576; low-quality evidence). Lower fat intake probably slightly reduced total cholesterol over six to 12 months compared to controls (MD -0.15 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.24 to -0.06; 1 RCT; n = 618; moderate-quality evidence), but may make little or no difference over longer time periods. Lower fat intake probably slightly decreased low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol over six to 12 months (MD -0.12 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04; 1 RCT; n = 618, moderate-quality evidence) and over two to five years (MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.01; 1 RCT; n = 623; moderate-quality evidence), compared to controls. However, lower total fat intake probably made little or no difference to HDL-C over a six- to 12-month period (MD -0.03 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.02; 1 RCT; n = 618; moderate-quality evidence), nor a two- to five-year period (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.04; 1 RCT; n = 522; moderate-quality evidence). Likewise, lower total fat intake probably made little or no difference to triglycerides in children over a six- to 12-month period (MD -0.01 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.06; 1 RCT; n = 618; moderate-quality evidence). Lower versus usual or modified fat intake may make little or no difference to height over more than five years (MD -0.60 cm, 95% CI -2.06 to 0.86; 1 RCT; n = 577; low-quality evidence).Over half the cohort analyses that reported on primary outcomes suggested that as total fat intake increases, body fatness measures may move in the same direction. However, heterogeneous methods and reporting across cohort studies, and predominantly very low-quality evidence, made it difficult to draw firm conclusions and true relationships may be substantially different. We were unable to reach firm conclusions. Limited evidence from three trials that randomised children to a lower total fat intake (30% or less TE) versus usual or modified fat intake, but with no intention to reduce weight, showed small reductions in body mass index, total- and LDL-cholesterol at some time points with lower fat intake compared to controls, and no consistent differences in effects on weight, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol or height. Associations in cohort studies that related total fat intake to later measures of body fatness in children were inconsistent and the quality of this evidence was mostly very low. Twenty-three out of 24 included studies were conducted in high-income countries, and may not be applicable in low- and middle-income settings. High-quality, longer-term studies are needed, that include low- and middle-income settings and look at both possible benefits and risks.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 155 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 33 21%
Student > Master 33 21%
Researcher 32 21%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Other 30 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 60 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 16%
Psychology 10 6%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Other 24 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#423,389
of 13,216,344 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,292
of 10,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,262
of 393,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#42
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,216,344 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,529 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 393,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.