To review the challenges and potential benefits of involving adolescents in the development and delivery of prevention programming. Key Points and Implications: Adolescent violence prevention programs are typically designed and delivered by adults in school-based settings. However, research has highlighted a number of problems with the effectiveness and sustainability of adult-designed prevention models. In this commentary, we consider the possibility that program effectiveness might be improved if innovative, evidence-based prevention strategies could be developed to help guide adolescents in developing and delivering prevention materials themselves. To inform our discussion, we surveyed 14 adolescent peer leaders about their experiences developing and delivering violence prevention in their schools and communities. Using their input, we critically review the limitations of adult-delivered prevention, discuss the potential benefits and challenges of involving adolescents in designing and delivering violence prevention content, and suggest a number of future directions for researchers and program developers.

No abstract

ObjectiveIn recent years, researchers have been working towards creating a standard conceptual framework of food parenting. To understand how parents’ reports correspond with the proposed model, the current study examined parents’ reports of their feeding behaviours in the context of a newly established framework of food parenting.DesignCross-sectional, with a two-week follow-up for a subset of the sample. Participants completed a quantitative and qualitative survey to assess food parenting. The survey included items from common food parenting instruments to measure the constructs posited in the framework. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted to ascertain which items related most closely to one another and factors were mapped on to existing constructs.SettingOnline.ParticipantsParents of children aged 2·5–7 years (n 496). Of these, 122 completed a two-week follow-up.ResultsAnalyses revealed eleven aspects of Structure (monitoring; distraction; family presence; meal/snack schedule; unstructured practices; healthy/unhealthy food availability; food preparation; healthy/unhealthy modelling; rules), ten aspects of Coercive Control (pressure to eat; using food to control emotions; food incentives to eat; food incentives to behave; non-food incentives to eat; restriction for health/weight; covert restriction; clean plate; harsh coercion) and seven aspects of Autonomy Promotion (praise; encouragement; nutrition education; child involvement; negotiation; responsive feeding; repeated offering). Content validity, assessed via parents’ open-ended explanations of their responses, was high, and test–retest reliability was moderate to high. Structure and Autonomy Promoting food parenting were highly positively correlated.ConclusionsIn general, parents’ responses provided support for the model, but suggested some amendments and refinements.

No abstract

Little research has considered how parents' socioeconomic indicators, body mass index (BMI), and dieting status relate to their food parenting. The current study used self-report data from parents of young children to examine group differences on three types of food parenting practices (Structure, Coercive Control, and Autonomy Promotion). Few group differences were found for socioeconomic indicators. However, parent dieting status moderated effects of parent BMI on structure and autonomy promotion. Obese, non-dieting parents reported lower scores on both variables. More research is needed to better understand how parents' dieting status moderates the effects of parent's weight.