Next Article in Journal
Development of a German Physical Literacy Assessment for Children in the Context of Health Promotion—An Explorative Approach
Next Article in Special Issue
Gastrointestinal Disorders and Food Selectivity: Relationship with Sleep and Challenging Behavior in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Previous Article in Journal
Hopelessness, Suicidality, and Co-Occurring Substance Use among Adolescent Hallucinogen Users—A National Survey Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Diagnostic Process for Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Worldwide Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Initial Somatic Assessment
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Children
Volume 9
Issue 12
10.3390/children9121907
children-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Food Neophobia in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD): A Nationwide Study in Brazil

by
Priscila Claudino de Almeida
1,*,
Renata Puppin Zandonadi
2,
Eduardo Yoshio Nakano
3,
Ivana Aragão Lira Vasconcelos
2 and
Raquel Braz Assunção Botelho
2
1
Graduate Program in Human Nutrition, University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, Brazil
2
Department of Nutrition, University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, Brazil
3
Department of Statistics, University of Brasília, Brasília 70910-900, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Children 2022, 9(12), 1907; https://doi.org/10.3390/children9121907
Submission received: 22 November 2022 / Revised: 1 December 2022 / Accepted: 2 December 2022 / Published: 6 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Autism Research: Diagnosis, Treatment and Best Practices)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Food neophobia (FN) is common among children with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), potentially impairing their health and diet quality. This study aimed to investigate and classify the prevalence of FN among 4-to-11-year-old Brazilian children with ASD. This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed by applying online a validated instrument to identify FN in Brazilian children with ASD through their caregivers’ responses for a national prevalence of FN in this group. The final sample included 593 children with ASD, 80.1% of boys, with a mean age of 6.72 ± 2.31 years, and 83% having only ASD. Almost 75% (n = 436) of the children with ASD had high food neophobia scores. The fruit neophobia domain had the lowest prevalence of high neophobia (63.7%). No significant difference in FN (total, fruit, and vegetable domains) was found, considering gender and age. There was no statistical difference in FN (all domains) by the number of residents in the same household, income, or the caregivers’ educational level. FN did not decrease in older children with ASD. FN is a more complex problem, requiring a multidisciplinary trained team to face the problem.

1. Introduction

Autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) is a heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disability that may lead to persistent deficits in social communication and interaction and behavioral challenges. It includes restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities [1,2]. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates the prevalence of ASD as 1 in 44 children and four times more frequent in boys than in girls [3].
The manifestations of ASD vary according to age, developmental level, and severity—hence the term “spectrum”. Typical behaviors are persistence on the same thing; an inflexible routine; monotonous eating habits; resistance to change; extreme reactions regarding food taste, smell, texture, or appearance; and excessive dietary restrictions due to hyperreactivity or hyporeactivity to sensory stimuli [1,2]. Considering these aspects, ASD has been associated with eating-related atypicality, such as food neophobia (FN). FN is characterized by the difficulty of trying novel foods that can potentially impair diet quality and health [4,5]. FN is influenced by heredity [6,7], prenatal experiences [8], parental influence on eating habits [9,10], parental pressure for the child to eat [9], parental affectivity during meals [9], child anxiety [9,11], sensory preferences [8], and an innate preference for some flavors [9]. FN has been investigated in several scenarios, such as in children [9], twins [6], adolescents [12], adult twins [13], adults [14], pregnant women [15], the elderly [16], and patients with celiac disease [17]; for specific foods [18,19]; and even during the COVID-19 pandemic [20]. The FN peak is in childhood, and there is a tendency of stabilization in adulthood [5,8,21,22,23]. All aspects related to food refusal may be worse in ASD due to its repetitive behavior and the reluctance to accept new issues or changes in routines [24,25,26].
Environmental factors, such as parents’ behaviors, mainly affect the food choices of a child with ASD and may encourage them to try a more diversified and healthier diet [24]. A high FN level is frequently related to low consumption of fruits and vegetables (the most common food neophobia in children) [21,27] and a higher intake of sweets and snacks [28,29,30]. Several studies have been performed on the nutritional interventions and eating disorders of children with ASD [24,25,26,31] but few on FN in this group [4,32,33]. No study has either evaluated the FN prevalence and classification in children with ASD or whether it occurs only during the peak that is up to 5 years and then decreases [9]. The hypothesis is that there is a high prevalence of FN in children with ASD due to their stereotypes, rigidity, and difficulties in social environments.
Data on the prevalence and classification of FN in children with ASD can help health professionals and parents with appropriate mealtime behavior and healthier eating habits in children with ASD. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate and classify the prevalence of FN among 4-to-11-year-old Brazilian children with ASD.

2. Materials and Methods

This research was a descriptive cross-sectional study performed by applying a previously validated instrument [34] in a sample of caregivers of children with ASD to evaluate and characterize the prevalence of FN in 4-to-11-year-old Brazilian children with ASD. According to the Declaration of Helsinki guidelines, the study was approved by the Health Sciences Ethics Committee, University of Brasilia (no. 4.407.816, November 2020), updated in 2022 (no. 5.438.498).

2.1. Participants

The sample comprised caregivers of children with ASD from Brazil (diagnosed by a physician using DSM-5) who consented to participate in the study and knew about the children’s eating habits (often following their meals). The caregiver was considered the person who cared for the child, such as the mother, father, a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, or cousin, or a person who cares for the child with no family relationship (Supplementary Table S1). Researchers excluded incomplete questionnaires.
Only one caregiver could answer the instrument, as informed by the researchers. Those with more than one child with ASD who met the inclusion criteria could answer the questionnaire once for each child. The snowball sampling technique was used for recruitment, with convenience non-probability sampling. The snowball sampling technique uses reference networks, so it is appropriate for research with groups that are difficult to access or even when dealing with more private topics. This study used public and private education centers as reference networks, such as schools [35]; groups of children with ASD and parents of children with ASD, such as the Moviment Pride Autism Brasil [36]; national and state autism groups; national clinical contacts, such as pediatricians, psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychopedagogues and teachers who care for autistic people; regional councils of nutritionists [37,38]; and universities, university centers, and colleges in their projects with the community (extension projects) that assisted children with ASD. In addition, we used disclosures on the internet in social media, such as Instagram® [39], Facebook® [40], and Twitter® profiles related to the studied group.

2.2. Instrument Application

The FN validated instrument [34] was spread using the online platform Google Forms® via social networks (such as Facebook®, Twitter®, and Instagram®), messaging apps, and email from November 2020 to November 2021.
Sociodemographics related to the respondent caregiver and child data were collected in the first part of the instrument. The caregiver’s variables were age, gender, degree of kinship, marital status, educational level, and family income. Children’s profiles in the study consisted of the following variables: gender, age, diagnoses, Brazilian region of living, housing area, and the number of people living in the same house.
Caregivers answered the instrument themselves. The FN instrument presented three domains: general, fruit, and vegetable neophobia. A better analysis of the scores was possible because each domain had a homogenous number of items [34], allowing the assessment of FN in each domain or in general.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Children with ASD were grouped by age into two categories (4–7 and 8–11 years) following a previous search [41] that mentioned that the cut-off point of FN intervention should start before 8 years of age. The children’s gender (male or female) was evaluated separately.
For accounting and classification, the response options were inverted on the scale, and the responses were scored from 0 to 4. The total score (25 items: general domain with 9 items, fruit domain with 8 items, and vegetable domain with 8 items) ranged from 0 to 100. Higher values indicated a higher FN of the evaluated child. Classification followed three levels of FN (low, medium, and high). Next, domain score cut-off points were up to 13 points (low), from 14 to 21 points (moderate), and 22 points or more (high). Moreover, the total score cut-off points were up to 40 points (low), 41 to 65 points (moderate), and 66 points or more (high).
The FN scores’ quantitative variables were determined using means and standard deviations. For categorical variables, frequencies were used. The FN scores for gender and age were compared using the independent Student’s t-test. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov (with Lilliefors adjustment) test verified the normality of scores. Pearson’s chi-square test was performed to compare the neophobia levels by gender, age, educational level of caregivers, number of residents in the same house, and family income. Two-tailed hypotheses and a significance level of 5% were considered for all tests. The Google Forms® platform data were extracted and analyzed using SPSS® 20.0 software.

3. Results

Of 742 participants who accessed the questionnaire, 593 constituted the final sample (Figure 1). Seventy-one children excluded from the sample were without ASD but had other conditions, such as Down syndrome, food intolerance, and allergies or had no diagnosed condition. Children with a confirmed diagnosis of ASD could have, in this study, other coexisting conditions beyond ASD.
Caregivers were mostly female (n = 565; 95.3%), in a stable relationship (n = 411; 69.3%), and mothers (n = 544; 91.7%) and had a high school degree (n = 163; 27.5%). The monthly family income was low; 57.5% received up to 3 minimum wages (MW), with the highest frequency up to 1 MW (n = 128; 21.6%) and up to 2 MW (n = 111; 18.7%). Some participants had no income (n = 32; 5.4%). During data collection, the MW was about USD 190 (conversion rate of USD 1.00 to BRL 5.52); see Supplementary Table S1.
Children were mostly boys (475; 80.1%) and living in urban areas (560; 94.4%), with a mean age of 6.72 ± 2.31 years (Supplementary Table S2) and a maximum of 10 people living in the same house (3.77 ± 1.14). Most children had only an ASD diagnosis (n = 492; 83%). The remaining also presented other medical diagnoses, such as food allergies/intolerance and Down syndrome (Supplementary Table S2).
Considering the total FN score, almost 75% (n = 436) of the children with ASD presented high scores for FN. The prevalence of low and high FN among children with ASD was 8.4% and 73.9%, respectively (Table 1). The FN domain for fruits had the lowest prevalence of high neophobia (63.7%).
There was no significant difference in FN (total, fruit, and vegetable domains) by gender and age (Table 2).
Results did not show a significant difference in FN (all domains) by the number of residents in the same household up to 3 people compared to 4 or more (p = 0.760; p = 0.538; p = 0.628; p = 0.698). There was no significant difference in FN by income when comparing up to 4 MW, 5 to 9 MW, and more than 10 MW (p = 0.178; p = 0.939; p = 0.403; p = 0.629). There was also not a significant difference in FN by the caregivers’ educational level (p = 0.184; p = 0.872; p = 0.196; p = 0.552); see Table 3.

4. Discussion

This study is the first to assess FN in Brazilian children with ASD using a validated questionnaire, bringing data from a large sample of children with ASD. It is crucial since FN can impair the nutritional status and health of children with ASD because they tend to experience a monotonous diet. Comprehending the factors that influence FN in children with ASD may help them and their families to improve their diet quality and plan their meals. Most respondents were female (n = 565; 95.3%) and mothers (n = 544; 91.7%), similar to those found in a nationwide study on FN in Brazilian children in which 92.4% of respondents were female and 86% were mothers [42]. These data were expected since females and mothers tend to be more concerned about children’s health and participate more often in studies [43,44,45,46,47]. It is important to emphasize that a previous study using the same FN instrument compared responses from parents (mothers or fathers) of the same children. The results showed that the responses were similar independent of the caregiver [48]. Therefore, the large number of mothers participating in this study probably did not influence our results.
In this study, the monthly family income was low (about 57.5% received up to 3 minimum wages (MW); Supplementary Table S1). The tendency of a low family income was previously mentioned in a study in Brazil that evaluated the quality of life of the parents of children with ASD in which 80.0% of the respondents had a family income up to 4 MW [31]. Our results differed from those in the Brazilian study on FN in neurotypical children, in which 69.1% had a family income higher than 3 MW [25]. The social, personal, and financial impact that the families of children with ASD experience makes living with autism a challenge. It is common for the parents of children with ASD to take care of their children by leaving their jobs (impairing family incomes) [49,50], which justifies the results in this study. Low-income families purchase less fresh fruits and vegetables and more unhealthy foods since they are cheap and energy- and sugar-dense products with a longer shelf-life and are acceptable to children [51]. In this sense, it would be plausible to associate FN with low income due to limited dietary variety. Our results did not show a significant difference in FN with different family income levels (Table 3). This result was similar to a study on neurotypical children [52] and another performed with young adults with ASD in which neophobia was not associated with family income [53]. In our study, most children had only ASD (n = 492; 83.0%) and 17.0% of the children with ASD also presented other medical diagnoses (such as food allergies/intolerance, Down syndrome, and others). This result for other medical diagnoses is lower than that in Brazilian children without ASD; 20.1% presented one or more diagnoses [42].
In our study, children with ASD were more neophobic than neurotypical Brazilian children [42]. A similar result was found in children 8 to 11 years old from England and Wales, in which children with ASD were more neophobic than children without ASD [4]. These results were expected since FN is often described as being chronic in ASD because of the insistence on rigid routines during mealtimes. Children with ASD demand food prepared the same way at each presentation and eat in the same ritualistic or obsessive manner at every presentation. Food refusal is commonly based on texture, color, brands and packaging, smell, food group, and temperature [26]. A meta-analysis showed that eating problems among children with ASD are five times higher than in their peers without ASD, suggesting that food selectivity contributes to nutritional impairments in children with ASD [54]. Similarly, our study showed high FN prevalence in 73.9% of the children with ASD, 2.2 times higher than in neurotypical Brazilian children (33.4%) [42]. In England, a study evaluated FN in 4564 children (8–11 years old) from a large community-based sample and a relatively small group of children with ASD (n = 37) [4]. Despite fewer participants with ASD, FN was higher in the ASD group than the non-ASD group [4]. In that study, gender and age were significantly associated with FN (p < 0.050), and younger children and males had higher FN scores. However, it was impossible to evaluate FN among children with ASD due to the small ASD sample [4]. Unlike our study, in a Brazilian study on FN in children, boys were more neophobic, considering general and fruit neophobia [42]. There was no difference between genders in vegetable FN [42], as in our results. In addition, similarly to our study, the authors did not find differences in FN among ages [42]. FN between age groups was not different in other studies [55,56]. However, studies have found that older children have lower scores on FN scales than younger ones [41,57,58]. As children grow up, FN tends to decrease because of different experiences as they learn about new foods and interact more with their environment [21]. Considering ASD characteristics, it would be expected that FN is most influenced by repetitive behavior than by age and gender, as found in our study.
Although the fruit neophobia domain was relatively low compared to the other domains, there was still a high prevalence of fruit neophobia. Fruits and vegetables are the most rejected food groups by children with ASD, which is associated with inadequate micronutrient intake [26]. This scenario probably occurs with children with ASD included in our study, given the high prevalence of FN of 73.9% in total (73.9% for vegetables, 63.7% for fruits, and 75.7% for the general domain). These results demonstrate that these children are neophobic in various contexts and tend to have a restricted diet. A study performed in the United States with 65 adolescents/young adults with ASD (12–28 years old) and 59 neurotypical adolescents/young adults (12–23 years old) showed that the ASD group was more neophobic than the non-ASD group [59].
The strength of our study was the sample size (n = 593) from all regions over the country since it dealt with individuals with specific conditions, such as children with ASD. However, there are some limitations, such as the potential selection bias. In the participants’ selection, we did not use a random sample, making it difficult to generalize the results, particularly those related to the respondent profile (e.g., mother or father) and internet access. The snowball sampling technique may not be the best option for this population, but a large number of participants allowed validation of the results. This method was chosen because it is less costly and less invasive, requiring less effort and time for the researchers and participants than a face-to-face interview. Face-to-face interviews were not possible for this study to reach participants due to geographical limitations [60,61] and the COVID-19 pandemic during data collection. It is important to highlight that data from Brazil showed that three in four Brazilians have internet access. About 93% of adults have a cellphone, the primary internet access tool [62]. In addition, our previous study compared responses given by mothers and fathers using the same questionnaire and showed that their answers were similar independent of being a mother or father [48]. Therefore, the large number of mothers participating in this study probably did not influence our results, but we cannot generalize them. Therefore, the method was considered efficient for data collection during the pandemic, despite the unrepresentativeness of the sample.

5. Conclusions

A high prevalence of total FN and others domains of FN was identified in children with ASD from Brazil, confirming that FN is a common problem for children with ASD and deserves more attention. FN did not decrease in older children with ASD, and no association was found with the educational level of caregivers, the number of residents in the same house, and family income. Boys and girls had similar neophobia, which shows that FN is a more complex problem, requiring a multidisciplinary team trained to face the problem.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/children9121907/s1: Table S1: Characterization of ASD caregivers (n = 593). Brazil, 2020-2021; Table S2: Characterization of ASD children (n = 593). Brazil, 2020–2021.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.C.d.A., R.B.A.B., R.P.Z. and I.A.L.V.; methodology, P.C.d.A., E.Y.N., R.B.A.B., R.P.Z. and I.A.L.V.; validation, P.C.d.A., R.B.A.B. and E.Y.N.; formal analysis, P.C.d.A. and E.Y.N.; investigation, P.C.d.A.; writing—original draft preparation, P.C.d.A., R.B.A.B., R.P.Z. and I.A.L.V.; writing—review and editing, P.C.d.A., R.B.A.B., R.P.Z., E.Y.N. and I.A.L.V.; project administration, R.B.A.B.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was partially funded by the National Coordination of High Education Personnel Formation Programs (CAPES) for the scientific support of Priscila Almeida and the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technologic Development (CNPq) for the scientific support of Renata Puppin Zandonadi and Raquel Braz Assunção Botelho.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Health Sciences Ethics Committee, University of Brasilia (no. 5.438.498).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the National Coordination of High Education Personnel Formation Programs (CAPES) and the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technologic Development (CNPq) for scientific support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. DSM-5: Manual Estatístico de Transtornos Mentais, 5th ed.; American Psychiatric Association: Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2014; ISBN 9788582710890. [Google Scholar]
  2. CDC. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/index.html (accessed on 3 October 2022).
  3. CDC. Data & Statistics on Autism Spectrum Disorder. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html (accessed on 3 October 2022).
  4. Wallace, G.L.; Llewellyn, C.; Fildes, A.; Ronald, A. Autism spectrum disorder and food neophobia: Clinical and subclinical links. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2018, 108, 701–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Kral, T.V.E. Food Neophobia and Its Association with Diet Quality and Weight Status in Children; Elsevier Ltd.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; ISBN 9780081019313. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cooke, L.J.; Haworth, C.M.A.; Wardle, J. Genetic and environmental influences on children’s food neophobia. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2007, 86, 428–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Knaapila, A.; Tuorila, H.; Silventoinen, K.; Keskitalo, K.; Kallela, M.; Wessman, M.; Peltonen, L.; Cherkas, L.F.; Spector, T.; Perola, M. Food neophobia shows heritable variation in humans. Physiol. Behav. 2007, 91, 573–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Lafraire, J.; Rioux, C.; Giboreau, A.; Picard, D. Food rejections in children: Cognitive and social/environmental factors involved in food neophobia and picky/fussy eating behavior. Appetite 2016, 96, 347–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Torres, T.d.O.; Gomes, D.R.; Mattos, M.P. Factors Associated with Food Neophobia in Children: Systematic Review. Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 2021, 39, e2020089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pliner, P. Development of Measures of Food Neophobia in Children. Appetite 1994, 23, 147–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Galloway, A.T.; Lee, Y.; Birch, L.L. Predictors and consequences of food neophobia and pickiness in young girls. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2003, 103, 692–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. de Andrade Previato, H.D.R.; Behrens, J.H. Taste-related factors and food neophobia: Are they associated with nutritional status and teenagers’ food choices? Nutrition 2017, 42, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Knaapila, A.; Silventoinen, K.; Broms, U.; Rose, R.J.; Perola, M.; Kaprio, J.; Tuorila, H.M. Food Neophobia in Young Adults: Genetic Architecture and Relation to Personality, Pleasantness and Use Frequency of Foods, and Body Mass Index—A Twin Study. Behav. Genet. 2010, 41, 512–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Jaeger, S.R.; Rasmussen, M.A.; Prescott, J. Relationships between food neophobia and food intake and preferences: Findings from a sample of New Zealand adults. Appetite 2017, 116, 410–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Paupério, A.; Severo, M.; Lopes, C.; Moreira, P.; Cooke, L.; Oliveira, A. Could the Food Neophobia Scale be adapted to pregnant women? A confirmatory factor analysis in a Portuguese sample. Appetite 2014, 75, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Soucier, V.D.; Doma, K.M.; Farrell, E.L.; Leith-Bailey, E.R.; Duncan, A.M. An examination of food neophobia in older adults. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 72, 143–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zysk, W.; Głabska, D.; Guzek, D. Food Neophobia in Celiac Disease and Other Gluten-Free Diet Individuals. Nutrients 2019, 11, 1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. De Andrade, J.C.; Sobral, L.A.; Deliza, R. Neofobia Alimentar Associada AO Consumo de Carne Ovina. In Proceedings of the 5° Simpósio de Segurança Alimentar, Alimentação e Saúde, Bento Gonçalves, Brazil; 2015. [Google Scholar]
  19. Sogari, G.; Menozzi, D.; Mora, C. The food neophobia scale and young adults’ intention to eat insect products. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2019, 43, 68–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Colín-Mar, I.; Zúñiga-Torres, M.G.; Rojas-Rivas, E. Neofobia alimentaria entre estudiantes universitarios: Un estudio de la percepción social de la alimentación en tiempos de COVID-19. Estud. Soc. Rev. Aliment. Contemp. y Desarro. Reg. 2021, 31, e211134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dovey, T.M.; Staples, P.A.; Gibson, E.L.; Halford, J.C.G. Food neophobia and “picky/fussy” eating in children: A review. Appetite 2008, 50, 181–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Hazley, D.; Stack, M.; Walton, J.; McNulty, B.A.; Kearney, J.M. Food neophobia across the life course: Pooling data from five national cross-sectional surveys in Ireland. Appetite 2022, 171, 105941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zou, J.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Q.; Liu, H.; Luo, J.; Ouyang, Y.; Wang, J.; Lin, Q. Cross-cultural adaption and validation of the Chinese version of the Child Food Neophobia Scale. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e026729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Lázaro, C.P.; Pondé, M.P. Narratives of mothers of children with autism spectrum disorders: Focus on eating behavior. Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2017, 39, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Monteiro, M.A.; dos Santos, A.A.A.; Gomes, L.M.M.; Rito, R.V.V.F. Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review about Nutritional Interventions. Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 2020, 38, e2018262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Marshall, J.; Hill, R.J.; Ziviani, J.; Dodrill, P. Features of feeding difficulty in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Int. J. Speech-Lang. Pathol. 2014, 16, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Guzek, D.; Głąbska, D.; Mellová, B.; Zadka, K.; Żywczyk, K.; Gutkowska, K. Influence of Food Neophobia Level on Fruit and Vegetable Intake and Its Association with Urban Area of Residence and Physical Activity in a Nationwide Case-Control Study of Polish Adolescents. Nutrients 2018, 10, 897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Cooke, L.; Carnell, S.; Wardle, J. Food neophobia and mealtime food consumption in 4–5 year old children. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2006, 3, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Helland, S.H.; Bere, E.; Bjørnarå, H.B.; Øverby, N.C. Food neophobia and its association with intake of fish and other selected foods in a Norwegian sample of toddlers: A cross-sectional study. Appetite 2017, 114, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Kozioł-Kozakowska, A.; Piórecka, B.; Schlegel-Zawadzka, M. Prevalence of food neophobia in pre-school children from southern Poland and its association with eating habits, dietary intake and anthropometric parameters: A cross-sectional study. Public Health Nutr. 2018, 21, 1106–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Ahearn, W.H.; Castine, T.; Nault, K.; Green, G. An assessment of food acceptance in children with autism or pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 2001, 31, 505–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Luisier, A.C.; Petitpierre, G.; Ferdenzi, C.; Bérod, A.C.; Giboreau, A.; Rouby, C.; Bensafi, M. Odor Perception in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and its Relationship to Food Neophobia. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Luisier, A.C.; Petitpierre, G.; Bérod, A.C.; Richoz, A.R.; Lao, J.; Caldara, R.; Bensafi, M. Visual and Hedonic Perception of Food Stimuli in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders and their Relationship to Food Neophobia. Perception 2019, 48, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. de Almeida, P.C.; Rosane, B.P.; Nakano, E.Y.; Vasconcelos, I.A.L.; Zandonadi, R.P.; Botelho, R.B.A. Instrument to Identify Food Neophobia in Brazilian Children by Their Caregivers. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. Catálogo de Escolas—Inep. Available online: https://www.gov.br/inep/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/dados-abertos/inep-data/catalogo-de-escolas (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  36. MOAB. MOAB—Orgulho Autista. Available online: https://www.moab.org.br/ (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  37. CRN-6, Conselhor Regional de Nutricionista da Região 6 UNB Promove Pesquisa Sobre Neofobia Alimentar em Crianças Brasileiras. Available online: https://www.crn6.org.br/unb-promove-pesquisa-sobre-neofobia-alimentar-em-criancas-brasileiras (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  38. CRN-10, CRN-10 on Instagram: “Participe e Divulgue a Pesquisa Sobre Neofobia Alimentar em Crianças Brasileiras”. Available online: https://z-p42.www.instagram.com/p/CI3gSLHAEq6/c/17907248992586983/?hl=af (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  39. Neofobia Alimentar Neofobia Alimentar (@neofobiaalimentar). Available online: https://www.instagram.com/neofobiaalimentar/ (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  40. Neofobia Alimentar Facebook da Pesquisa Neofobia Alimentar. Available online: https://www.facebook.com/neofobia.alimentar (accessed on 15 November 2022).
  41. Laureati, M.; Bergamaschi, V.; Pagliarini, E. School-based intervention with children. Peer-modeling, reward and repeated exposure reduce food neophobia and increase liking of fruits and vegetables. Appetite 2014, 83, 26–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. de Almeida, P.C.; Vasconcelos, I.A.L.; Zandonadi, R.P.; Nakano, E.Y.; Raposo, A.; Han, H.; Araya-Castillo, L.; Ariza-Montes, A.; Botelho, R.B.A. Food Neophobia among Brazilian Children: Prevalence and Questionnaire Score Development. Sustainability 2022, 14, 975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Davidson, D.J.; Freudenburg, W.R. Gender and Environmental Risk Concerns: A Review and Analysis of Available Research. Environ. Behav. 1996, 28, 302–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Chen, M.F. Consumers’ health and taste attitude in Taiwan: The impacts of modern tainted food worries and gender difference. Br. Food J. 2013, 115, 526–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lee, A.R.; Wolf, R.; Contento, I.; Verdeli, H.; Green, P.H.R. Coeliac disease: The association between quality of life and social support network participation. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 2016, 29, 383–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Castilhos, A.C.; Gonçalves, B.C.; Macedo E Silva, M.; Lanzoni, L.A.; Metzger, L.R.; Kotze, L.M.S.; Nisihara, R.M. Quality of Life Evaluation in Celiac Patients from Southern Brazil. Arq. Gastroenterol. 2015, 52, 171–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. De Lorenzo, C.M.; Xikota, J.C.; Wayhs, M.C.; Nassar, S.M.; De Souza Pires, M.M. Evaluation of the quality of life of children with celiac disease and their parents: A case-control study. Qual. Life Res. 2012, 21, 77–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Pratesi, C.B.; Garcia, A.B.; Pratesi, R.; Gandolfi, L.; Hecht, M.; Nakano, E.Y.; Zandonadi, R.P. Quality of Life in Caregivers of Children and Adolescents with Autistic Spectrum Disorder: Development and Validation of the Questionnaire. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. McCabe, H. Employment Experiences, Perspectives, and Wishes of Mothers of Children with Autism in the People’s Republic of China. J. Appl. Res. Intellect. Disabil. 2010, 23, 122–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Cidav, Z.; Marcus, S.C.; Mandell, D.S. Implications of childhood autism for parental employment and earnings. Pediatrics 2012, 129, 617–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Kraak, V.I.; Story, M.; Wartella, E.A.; Ginter, J. Industry Progress to Market a Healthful Diet to American Children and Adolescents. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2011, 41, 322–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Johnson, S.L.; Davies, P.L.; Boles, R.E.; Gavin, W.J.; Bellows, L.L. Young Children’s Food Neophobia Characteristics and Sensory Behaviors Are Related to Their Food Intake. J. Nutr. 2015, 145, 2610–2616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Panossian, C.; Lyons-Wall, P.; Whitehouse, A.; Oddy, W.H.; Lo, J.; Scott, J.; O’Sullivan, T.A. Young Adults with High Autistic-Like Traits Displayed Lower Food Variety and Diet Quality in Childhood. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 2021, 51, 685–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sharp, W.G.; Berry, R.C.; McCracken, C.; Nuhu, N.N.; Marvel, E.; Saulnier, C.A.; Klin, A.; Jones, W.; Jaquess, D.L. Feeding problems and nutrient intake in children with autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis and comprehensive review of the literature. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 2013, 43, 2159–2173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kutbi, H.A.; Alhatmi, A.A.; Alsulami, M.H.; Alghamdi, S.S.; Albagar, S.M.; Mumena, W.A.; Mosli, R.H. Food neophobia and pickiness among children and associations with socioenvironmental and cognitive factors. Appetite 2019, 142, 104373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Dovey, T.M.; Shuttleworth, M. Food neophobia and willingness to eat vegetables in British rural and urban children. Appetite 2006, 47, 263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Koivisto Hursti, U.K.; Sjödén, P.O. Food and general neophobia and their relationship with self-reported food choice: Familial resemblance in Swedish families with children of ages 7–17 years. Appetite 1997, 29, 89–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Koivisto, U.K.; Sjödén, P.O. Food and general neophobia in Swedish families: Parent-child comparisons and relationships with serving specific foods. Appetite 1996, 26, 107–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kuschner, E.S.; Eisenberg, I.W.; Orionzi, B.; Simmons, W.K.; Kenworthy, L.; Martin, A.; Wallace, G.L. A preliminary study of self-reported food selectivity in adolescents and young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Res. Autism Spectr. Disord. 2015, 15–16, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Evans, J.R.; Mathur, A. The value of online surveys. Internet Res. 2005, 15, 195–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. IBGE IBGE|Censo 2010|Resultados. Available online: https://censo2010.ibge.gov.br/resultados.html (accessed on 5 November 2022).
  62. IBGE PNAD Contínua TIC 2017: Internet Chega a Três em Cada Quatro Domicílios do País|Agência de Notícias. Available online: https://agenciadenoticias.ibge.gov.br/agencia-sala-de-imprensa/2013-agencia-de-noticias/releases/23445-pnad-continua-tic-2017-internet-chega-a-tres-em-cada-quatro-domicilios-do-pais (accessed on 28 October 2022).
Children 09 01907 g001 550
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the study sample (Brazil, 2020–2021). ASD: autistic spectrum disorder.
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the study sample (Brazil, 2020–2021). ASD: autistic spectrum disorder.
Children 09 01907 g001
Table
Table 1. Distribution of the sample according to food neophobia classification in children with ASD (n = 593; Brazil, 2020–2021).
Table 1. Distribution of the sample according to food neophobia classification in children with ASD (n = 593; Brazil, 2020–2021).
Food Neophobia
LowModerateHigh
General neophobia domain *39 (6.6%)105 (17.7%)449 (75.7%)
Fruit neophobia domain *68 (11.5%)147 (24.8%)378 (63.7%)
Vegetable neophobia domain *50 (8.4%)105 (17.7%) 438 (73.9%)
Total score **50 (8.4%)107 (18.0%)436 (73.9%)
* Domain score cut-off points: low—up to 13 points; moderate—from 14 to 21 points; high—22 points or more. ** Total score cut-off points: low—up to 40 points; moderate—from 41 to 65 points; high—66 points or more.
Table
Table 2. Scores and distribution of the food neophobia classification by gender and age group in children with ASD (Brazil, 2020–2021).
Table 2. Scores and distribution of the food neophobia classification by gender and age group in children with ASD (Brazil, 2020–2021).
GenderAge
Girls
(n = 118)		Boys
(n = 475)		p-Value4–7 Years
(n = 378)		8–11 Years
(n = 215)		p-Value
General neophobia
Mean (SD)24.86 (7.56)25.84 (7.03)0.184 *25.31 (7.18)26.23 (7.06)0.135 *
Low (≤13)10 (8.5%)29 (6.1%) 27 (7.1%)12 (5.6%)
Moderate (14 to 21)22 (18.6%)83 (17.5%)0.596 **71 (18.8%)34 (15.8)0.458 **
High (≥22)86 (72.9%)363 (76.4%) 280 (74.1%)169 (78.6%)
Fruit neophobia
Mean (SD)22.23 (7.63)23.08 (7.11)0.252 *22.61 (7.26)23.43 (7.14)0.184 *
Low (≤13)17 (14.4%)51 (10.7%) 46 (12.2%)22 (10.2%)
Moderate (14 to 21)27 (22.9%)120 (25.3%)0.509 **87 (23.0%)60 (27.9%)0.376 **
High (≥22)74 (62.7%)304 (64.0%) 245 (64.8%)133 (61.9%)
Vegetable neophobia
Mean (SD)24.42 (8.06)24.87 (6.92)0.543 *24.59 (7.16)25.13 (7.15)0.379 *
Low (≤13)13 (11.0%)37 (7.8%) 33 (8.7%)17 (7.9%)
Moderate (14 to 21)21 (17.8%)84 (71.2%)0.519 **63 (16.7%)42 (19.5%)0.662 **
High (≥22)84 (71.2%)354 (74.5%) 282 (74.6%)156 (72.6%)
Total
Mean (SD)71.52 (21.37)73.79 (19.35)0.264 *72.52 (19.94)74.79 (19.43)0.179 *
Low (up to 40)13 (11.0%)37 (7.8%) 34 (9.0%)16 (7.4%)
Moderate (41 to 65)20 (16.9%)87 (18.3%)0.519 **70 (18.5%)37 (17.2%)0.714 **
High (66 or more)85 (72.0%)351 (73.9%) 274 (72.5%)162 (75.3%)
* Independent t-test; ** Pearson’s chi-square test.
Table
Table 3. Distribution of the food neophobia classification by the educational level of caregivers, the number of residents in the same house, and family income (Brazil, 2020–2021).
Table 3. Distribution of the food neophobia classification by the educational level of caregivers, the number of residents in the same house, and family income (Brazil, 2020–2021).
Educational Level of CaregiversNumber of Residents in
the Same House		Family Income
High School
(n = 314)		Higher Education
(n = 279)		p-Value ****Up to 3 People
(n = 140)		4 or More (n = 326)p-Value ****Up to 4 MW ***
(n = 376)		5 to 9 MW ***
(n = 105)		10 MW *** or More
(n = 77)		p-Value ****
General neophobia *
Low19 (6.1%)20 (7.2%) 19 (7.3%)20 (6.0%) 28 (7.4%)2 (1.9%)7 (9.1%)
Moderate64 (20.3%)41 (14.7%)0.18444 (16.7%)61 (18.5%)0.76071 (18.9%)17 (16.2%)11 (14.3%)0.178
High231 (73.6%)218 (78.1%) 199 (76.0%)250 (75.5%) 277 (73.7%)86 (81.9%)59 (76.6%)
Fruit neophobia *
Low34 (10.8%)34 (12.2%) 33 (12.6%)35 (10.6%) 45 (12.0%)11 (10.5%)8 (10.4%)
Moderate78 (24.9%)69 (24.7%)0.87260 (22.9%)87 (26.3%)0.53894 (25.0%)24 (22.8%)21 (27.3%)0.939
High202 (64.3%)176 (63.1%) 169 (64.5%)209 (63.1%) 237 (63.0%)70 (66.7%)48 (62.3%)
Vegetable neophobia *
Low21 (6.7%)29 (10.4%) 22 (8.4%)28 (8.5%) 32 (8.5%)7 (6.7%)10 (13.0%)
Moderate53 (16.9%)52 (18.6%)0.19642 (16.0%)63 (19.0%)0.62861 (16.2%)21 (20.0%)16 (20.8%)0.403
High240 (76.4%)198 (71.0%) 198 (75.6%)240 (72.5%) 283 (75.3%)77 (73.3%)51 (66.2%)
Total **
Low23 (7.3%)27 (9.7%) 24 (9.2%)26 (7.9%) 32 (8.5%)8 (7.6%)7 (9.1%)
Moderate59 (18.8%)48 (17.2%)0.55244 (16.8%)63 (19.0%)0.69874 (19.7%)14 (13.4%)15 (19.5%)0.629
High232 (73.9%)204 (73.1%) 194 (74.0%)242 (73.1%) 270 (71.8%)83 (79.0%)55 (71.4%)
* Domain score cut-off points: low—up to 13 points; moderate—from 14 to 21 points; high—22 points or more. ** Total score cut-off points: low—up to 40 points; moderate—from 41 to 65 points; high—66 points or more. *** Minimum wage. **** Pearson’s chi-square test.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

de Almeida, P.C.; Zandonadi, R.P.; Nakano, E.Y.; Vasconcelos, I.A.L.; Botelho, R.B.A. Food Neophobia in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD): A Nationwide Study in Brazil. Children 2022, 9, 1907. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9121907

AMA Style

de Almeida PC, Zandonadi RP, Nakano EY, Vasconcelos IAL, Botelho RBA. Food Neophobia in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD): A Nationwide Study in Brazil. Children. 2022; 9(12):1907. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9121907

Chicago/Turabian Style

de Almeida, Priscila Claudino, Renata Puppin Zandonadi, Eduardo Yoshio Nakano, Ivana Aragão Lira Vasconcelos, and Raquel Braz Assunção Botelho. 2022. "Food Neophobia in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD): A Nationwide Study in Brazil" Children 9, no. 12: 1907. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9121907

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop