2014
DOI: 10.1080/02739615.2014.979925
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of the Brief Assessment of Mealtime Behavior in Children (BAMBIC) for children in a non-clinical sample

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
3
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A benefit of the current study is that more detail regarding the prevalence of early feeding problems seen in the ASD population were gathered compared with previous retrospective chart reviews during which parents reported mostly whether early feeding problems were present or absent (Dominick et al, 2007; Olsson et al, 2013). Furthermore, results also suggest that male children are more likely to have feeding problems than female children—a finding supporting past research that has found males tend to show more feeding problems than females, separately and apart from their greater tendency to have ASD (Seiverling et al, 2016). The present study also gathered information on food overstuffing, a feeding problem that has not been examined in children with ASD, but which may be especially common in children with motor delays (Field et al, 2003; Reilly, Skuse, & Poblete, 1996).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A benefit of the current study is that more detail regarding the prevalence of early feeding problems seen in the ASD population were gathered compared with previous retrospective chart reviews during which parents reported mostly whether early feeding problems were present or absent (Dominick et al, 2007; Olsson et al, 2013). Furthermore, results also suggest that male children are more likely to have feeding problems than female children—a finding supporting past research that has found males tend to show more feeding problems than females, separately and apart from their greater tendency to have ASD (Seiverling et al, 2016). The present study also gathered information on food overstuffing, a feeding problem that has not been examined in children with ASD, but which may be especially common in children with motor delays (Field et al, 2003; Reilly, Skuse, & Poblete, 1996).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Finally, few studies examining prevalence and onset of feeding problems in children with and without developmental disabilities have looked at demographic variables or child characteristics known to be associated with early feeding problems. Past research suggests that low neighborhood income (Janssen, Boyce, Simpson, & Pickett, 2006) as well as male gender and younger age (Seiverling et al, 2016) may be associated with various eating problems in children.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The present study’s measurement of one BAMBIC subscale (Limited Variety) was also problematic because its internal reliability values were below the traditionally expected .70, with Cronbach’s α = .43 at pre-intervention and .63 at post-intervention. This finding is not consistent with previous studies examining the psychometrics of the BAMBIC measure, which found internal reliability values well above .70 (Hendy et al, 2013; Seiverling et al, 2016) and warrants future research. The present study, as far as we are aware, is the first to use the BAMBIC subscales as outcome measures in evaluating IIBT effectiveness.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…It is widely accepted that the body mass index is not associated with emotional undereating (Webber et al, 2009). The results indicated that children with ASD exhibited more food refusal behaviours than TD children, which was suggested by the previous research (Hendy et al, 2013; Meral, 2017; Meral & Fidan, 2014; Seiverling et al, 2016). Food refusal, such as food expulsion, keeping the mouth closed, crying, and tantrums, may result in the avoidance of all feeding situations (De Moor et al, 2007; Hendy et al, 2013; Seiverling et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 73%
“…The scale comprises three distinct dimensions with 10 items: limited variety, food refusal, and disruptive behaviour. Scoring varies by the groups (the group with ASD, the TD group, and those with special needs) on these three dimensions (Hendy et al, 2013; Seiverling et al, 2016).…”
Section: Methodology and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%