A comparison of pre-prepared commercial infant feeding meals with home-cooked recipes
MetadataShow full item record
Objectives. To compare the cost, nutritional and food variety contents of commercial meals and published infant and young child feeding (IYCF) home-cooked recipes, and to compare nutritional contents to age-specific recommendations. Design. Cross-sectional study. Setting. Full range of pre-prepared main-meals available within the UK market. Main meal recipes identified from a survey of Amazon’s top 20 bestsellers and IYCF cookbooks available from local libraries. Samples. 278 commercial IYCF savoury meals from UK market and 408 home-cooked recipes from bestselling IYCF published cookbooks. Main Outcome Measures. Cost and nutritional content per 100g and food variety per meal for both commercial meals and home-cooked recipes. Results. Commercial products provided more ‘vegetable’ variety per meal (median=3.0; r=-0.33) than home-cooked recipes (2.0). Recipes provided 26% more energy and 44% more protein and total fat compared to commercial products (r=-0.40, -0.31, -0.40 respectively) whilst costing less (£0.33/100g and £0.68/100g respectively). The majority of commercial products (65%) met energy density recommendations but 50% of home-cooked recipes exceeded the maximum range. Conclusions. The majority of commercial meals provided an energy dense meal with greater vegetable variety per meal to their home-cooked counterparts. Home-cooked recipes provided a cheaper meal option however the majority exceeded recommendations for energy and fats.
Carstairs , S A , Craig , L C A , Marais , D , Bora , O E & Kiezebrink , K 2016 , ' A comparison of pre-prepared commercial infant feeding meals with home-cooked recipes ' Archives of Disease in Childhood , vol 101 , no. 11 , pp. 1037-1042 . DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2015-310098
Archives of Disease in Childhood
© 2016, the Author(s). This work has been made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created, accepted version manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at adc.bmj.com / https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2015-310098
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.