Cohort study evaluates infant feeding practices and dietary quality in high-risk children, indicating a need for healthier interventions.
BACKGROUND: Healthy feeding practices during the first 2 years of life are crucial for ensuring adequate growth and development. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices among high-risk children during the first 2 years of life. METHODS: Cohort study including former Neonatal Intensive Care Unit children followed at two University hospitals from birth until 24 months of age. Dietary data were collected using 24-h recalls, and diet quality was assessed based on the World Health Organization's IYCF indicators, including the consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF). Early weaning was defined as the interruption of exclusive breastfeeding before 6 months of age, according to World Health Organization recommendations. Linear mixed-effects models were used to evaluate changes over time in the proportion of ultra-processed food consumption and dietary diversity. RESULTS: Among the 155 children included in the study, early weaning occurred in 82.9% of participants. Minimum dietary diversity increased with age (58.0%-85.0%; p < 0.001), while consumption of vitamin A-rich foods remained stable (average 63%; p = 0.90) and below recommended levels. Significant increases were observed in the intake of added sugar (26.0%-67.0%; p < 0.001), sugar-sweetened beverages (17.0%-57.0%; p < 0.001), and ultra-processed foods (41.0%-78.0%; p < 0.001) between 6 and 24 months. Full-term children were less likely to achieve dietary diversity compared with preterm infants (OR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.09-0.80; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The diet quality of children was suboptimal during the first 2 years of life, marked by early weaning, insufficient intake of vitamin A-rich foods, and high exposure to ultra-processed products. These results highlight the urgent need for targeted interventions to promote healthier feeding practices in this vulnerable population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ribas et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: