Dataset Information

Parental feeding and childhood genetic risk for obesity: exploring hypothetical interventions with causal inference methods.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Parental-feeding behaviors are common intervention targets for childhood obesity, but often only deliver small changes. Childhood BMI is partly driven by genetic effects, and the extent to which parental-feeding interventions can mediate child genetic liability is not known. Here we aim to examine how potential interventions on parental-feeding behaviors can mitigate some of the association between child genetic liability and BMI in early adolescence, using causal inference methods.

Methods

Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children were used to estimate an interventional disparity measure for a child polygenic score for BMI (PGS-BMI) on BMI at 12 years. The approach compares counterfactual outcomes for different hypothetical interventions on parental-feeding styles applied when children are 10-11 years (n = 4248). Results are presented as adjusted total association (Adj-Ta) between genetic liability (PGS-BMI) and BMI at 12 years, versus the interventional disparity measure-direct effect (IDM-DE), which represents the association that would remain, had we intervened on parental-feeding under different scenarios.

Results

For children in the top quintile of genetic liability, an intervention shifting parental feeding to the levels of children with lowest genetic risk, resulted in a difference of 0.81 kg/m² in BMI at 12 years (Adj-Ta = 3.27, 95% CI: 3.04, 3.49; versus IDM-DE = 2.46, 95% CI: 2.24, 2.67).

Conclusions

Findings suggest that parental-feeding interventions have the potential to buffer some of the genetic liability for childhood obesity. Further, we highlight a novel way to analyze potential interventions for health conditions only using secondary data analyses, by combining methodology from statistical genetics and social epidemiology.

SUBMITTER: Herle M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9239906 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe methods with which prediction models are usually developed mean that neither the parameters nor the predictions should be interpreted causally. For many applications, this is perfectly acceptable. However, when prediction models are used to support decision making, there is often a need for predicting outcomes under hypothetical interventions.AimsWe aimed to identify published methods for developing and validating prediction models that enable risk estimation of outcomes under hypothetical interventions, utilizing causal inference. We aimed to identify the main methodological approaches, their underlying assumptions, targeted estimands, and potential pitfalls and challenges with using the method. Finally, we aimed to highlight unresolved methodological challenges.MethodsWe systematically reviewed literature published by December 2019, considering papers in the health domain that used causal considerations to enable prediction models to be used for predictions under hypothetical interventions. We included both methodologies proposed in statistical/machine learning literature and methodologies used in applied studies.ResultsWe identified 4919 papers through database searches and a further 115 papers through manual searches. Of these, 87 papers were retained for full-text screening, of which 13 were selected for inclusion. We found papers from both the statistical and the machine learning literature. Most of the identified methods for causal inference from observational data were based on marginal structural models and g-estimation.ConclusionsThere exist two broad methodological approaches for allowing prediction under hypothetical intervention into clinical prediction models: (1) enriching prediction models derived from observational studies with estimated causal effects from clinical trials and meta-analyses and (2) estimating prediction models and causal effects directly from observational data. These methods require extending to dynamic treatment regimes, and consideration of multiple interventions to operationalise a clinical decision support system. Techniques for validating 'causal prediction models' are still in their infancy.

Project description:BackgroundChildhood obesity prevention interventions have engaged coalitions in study design, implementation, and/or evaluation to improve research outcomes; yet, no systematic reviews have been conducted on this topic. This mixed methods review aims to characterize the processes and dynamics of coalition engagement in community-based childhood obesity prevention interventions.MethodsData Sources: Studies extracted from Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science; complementary original survey and interview data among researchers of included studies. Eligible Studies: Multisetting community-based obesity prevention interventions in high-income countries targeting children 0-12 years with anthropometric, behavioral, or environmental/policy outcomes. The Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) Conceptual Model was used as an overarching framework.ResultsThirteen studies met inclusion criteria. Elements of CBPR were evident across all studies with community engagement in problem identification (n = 7), design/planning (n = 11), implementation (n = 12), evaluation (n = 4), dissemination (n = 2), and sustainability (n = 10) phases. Five studies reported favorable intervention effects on anthropometric (n = 4), behavioral (n = 1), and/or policy (n = 1) outcomes; descriptive associations suggested that these studies tended to engage community members in a greater number of research phases. Researchers involved in 7 of 13 included studies completed a survey and interview. Respondents recalled the importance of group facilitation, leadership, and shared understanding to multisector coalition work. Perceived coalition impacts included community capacity building and intervention sustainability.ConclusionsThis review contributes to a deeper understanding of intervention processes and dynamics within communities engaged in childhood obesity prevention. Future research should more rigorously assess and report on coalition involvement to assess the influence of coalitions on multiple outcomes, including child weight status.