Children's behavioural and emotional wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from the Born in Bradford COVID-19 mixed methods longitudinal study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a multitude of immediate social restrictions for many across the world. In the UK, the lives of children and young people were quickly impacted when COVID-19 restrictions led to school closures for most children and restrictions on social interactions. The Born in Bradford COVID-19 longitudinal research study explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of children and their families living in Bradford. Methods: Surveys were administered during the first wave of the pandemic (March to June 2020) and compared to findings from before the pandemic. The current study examined the social and emotional wellbeing of children from before to during the pandemic, measured using the parent completed Strengths and Difficulties questionnaire (SDQ). Regression analyses looked at associations between a range of social determinants of health and changes in SDQ scores. Results: The results showed that those children most likely to experience difficulties during the pandemic were boys, younger children, those from White British ethnicity (compared to Pakistani heritage children) and those living in the most deprived areas. There were associations between experiencing difficulties and: food insecurity; financial worry; getting below recommended levels of physical activity; and having less than the recommended amount of sleep. Conclusions: The effect of COVID-19 restrictions are likely to have had negative consequences on children that could, in time, have long-lasting impacts on the health, wellbeing and development of children in the UK.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused immediate and long-lasting social restrictions to be implemented here in the UK and across the world. In the UK, children and young people were quickly affected by these restrictions that led to school closures and other restrictions that prevented these individuals from socialising in person with one another. This study explored the impact that the pandemic had on the wellbeing of children by comparing data from before the pandemic with data collected during the pandemic. The data that has been collected looks at the behavioural strengths and difficulties that children are displaying. Our exploration found that children that were most likely to experience difficulties during the pandemic were boys, younger children, those who were White British and those who lived in the most deprived areas. The effect of the COVID-19 restrictions are likely to have had a negative impact on children and young people which in time may impact the health and development of children living here in the UK.

Study protocol for a systems evaluation of an infant mental health service: Integration of 'Little Minds Matter' into the early years system.

Infant Mental Health relates to how well a child develops socially and emotionally from birth to age three. There is a well-established link between parent-infant relationship quality, Infant Mental Health, and longer-term social and emotional development there is a lack of evidence-based interventions that support the parent-infant relationship and/or protect against poor Infant Mental Health. Little Minds Matter is a specialist Infant Mental Health service developed in Bradford (UK) to support parent-infant relationships by providing training and consultation for professionals and direct clinical work to families. The successful implementation of this intervention depends upon how well it becomes embedded within, or integrated into, the early years system. For the purposes of this study, the early years system includes health, social and education services that support child health and development from conception to primary school entry at age five. This study protocol aims to apply a systems approach to evaluate this service and provide a perspective on the process of embedding a complex service within a healthcare system. Multiple methods will be used to investigate embeddedness within the wider early years system. Routinely collected quantitative data about the service will be used to develop a system map showing interaction with related services. Qualitative data will be collected at two time points through interviews with individuals involved in the design and provision of the service, and professionals working within the early years system. Framework analysis will be used to analyse the data inductively and deductively within a systems approach. The findings from this study will provide evidence to inform the ongoing implementation of the service for providers and commissioning bodies. Exploring the application of a systems approach in this clinical context will have application more broadly for researchers evaluating complex interventions and services within a wider system.

Exploring the feasibility of evaluating a community alliance welfare advice programme co-located in primary care in Bradford: an uncontrolled before and after study.

BACKGROUND: Welfare advice services co-located in health settings are known to improve financial security. However, little is known on how to effectively evaluate these services. This study aims to explore the feasibility of evaluating a welfare advice service co-located in a primary care setting in a deprived and ethnically diverse population. It seeks to investigate whether the proposed evaluation tools and processes are acceptable and feasible to implement and whether they are able to detect any evidence of promise for this intervention on the mental health, wellbeing and financial security of participants. METHODS: An uncontrolled before and after study design was utilised. Data on mental health, wellbeing, quality of life and financial outcomes were collected at baseline prior to receiving welfare advice and at three months follow-up. Multiple logistic and linear regression models were used to explore individual differences in self-reported financial security and changes to mental health, wellbeing and quality of life scores before and after the provision of welfare advice. RESULTS: Overall, the majority of key outcome measures were well completed, indicating participant acceptability of the mental health, wellbeing, quality of life and financial outcome measures used in this population. There was evidence suggestive of an improvement in participant financial security and evidence of promise for improvements in measured wellbeing and health-related quality of life for participants accessing services in a highly ethnically diverse population. Overall, the VCS Alliance welfare advice programme generated a total of £21,823.05 for all participants, with participants gaining an average of £389.70 per participant for participants with complete financial outcome data. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates the feasibility of evaluating a welfare advice service co-located in primary care in a deprived and ethnically diverse setting utilising the ascribed mental health, wellbeing and quality of life and financial outcome tools. It provides evidence of promise to support the hypothesis that the implementation of a welfare advice service co-located in a health setting can improve health and wellbeing and reduce health inequalities.

Effectiveness of a midwife-led continuity of care model on birth outcomes and maternal mental health in vulnerable women: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Women from social disadvantage are at greater risk of poor birth outcomes. The midwife-led continuity of care (MCC) model, which offers flexible and relational care from a small team of midwives, has demonstrated improved birth outcomes. In the general population, the impact of MCC on socially disadvantaged women and on birth outcomes is still unclear. This protocol describes a pragmatic evaluation of the MCC model in a socially disadvantaged population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An open-labelled individual prospective randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis, from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2024.Women will be randomly allocated to MCC or standard care as part of usual midwifery practice. Participants and midwives will not be blinded, but researchers will be. An internal pilot will test the feasibility of this process.Participants are those randomised into MCC or standard care, who consent to participate in one of two Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohort studies. Outcomes are taken from routinely linked health data, supplemented by additional data capture. The sample size is fixed by the capacity of MCC teams, commissioning duration and numbers recruited into the cohort. The estimated maximum fixed sample size is 1,410 pregnancies (minimum 734).Intention to treat (ITT) analysis will be undertaken to assess the impact of MCC on two independent primary outcomes. An economic evaluation will explore the impact on health resource use and a process evaluation will explore fidelity to the MCC model, and barriers/facilitators to implementation from midwives' and women's perspectives. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained for the randomisation in midwifery practice, use of the cohort data for evaluation and for the process evaluation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and translated into policy briefings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: IsRCTNhttps://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN31836167.

Examining individual social status using the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status: Findings from the Born in Bradford study.

Subjective social status is how a person perceives their social class relative to other people and has frequently been associated with people's health and well-being. A frequently used measure of subjective social status is the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status that depicts social status as a 10 rung ladder, asking individuals to rank themselves on this ladder relative to other people, either in their local neighbourhood or wider society. The Born in Bradford's Better Start birth cohort study aims to understand the lives, relationships, wellbeing, and social and economic circumstances of pregnant women and their children in three inner city areas of Bradford, UK. Pregnant mothers were asked to report their subjective social status, using the MacArthur subjective social status scales, comparing themselves to other people in their local neighbourhood and in England as a whole. This paper explores the characteristics of the women who gave responses, examines associations between the MacArthur subjective social status measures and other subjective and objective measures and looks specifically at the characteristics of women who reported either very low or very high subjective social status. On average, women reported that they had a higher social status compared to others within their local neighbourhood (mean ladder rung = 6) and, although participants were from areas of Bradford with very high levels of deprivation, 23% placed themselves on the top three rungs, 8-10. Respondents reported that they had an average social status when comparing themselves to people in all of England (mean ladder rung = 5) and 13% placed themselves on the top rungs 8-10. These findings raise important questions about the interpretation of the MacArthur scale of subjective social status.

Daily Hassles and Eating Behaviours in Adults: Exploring the Buffering Effects of Daily Uplifts.

Existing research has shown that daily hassles are associated with increases in between-meal snacking, often resulting in the increased consumption of high sweet and high fat foods. However, it is currently unclear whether the presence of daily uplifts may buffer the negative effects of daily hassles on unhealthy eating behaviour. Therefore, the current study explored the main and interactive effects of daily hassles and daily uplifts on snacking behaviours in adults. One hundred and sixty participants (M age: 23.69 years) reported their daily hassles, daily uplifts and snacking behaviours over the preceding 24 hour period. Participants' emotional eating style was also measured. Using moderated regression analysis, the daily hassles x daily uplifts interaction was found to be statistically significant for both total snack and unhealthy snack consumption. Simple slopes analyses showed that the relationship between daily hassles and snacking was weaker and non-significant at higher levels of daily uplifts compared to moderate and lower levels. The current study provides novel evidence that daily uplifts may act as a buffer against the negative impact of daily hassles on food consumption.

Turning their backs on the 'ladder of success'? Unexpected responses to the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status.

Subjective social status measures a person's perception of their social class relative to other people and has theoretically and empirically been positively associated with health and wellbeing. A widely used measure of this construct is the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status, which asks people to report their social status by placing themselves on a ladder which represents the social hierarchy of their society or community; the scale has been used with many different populations across many countries. In this research note, we describe two cases where we encountered unexpected reactions to the MacArthur Scale that we believe highlight (a) the salience of relative social status for people's wellbeing in contemporary society and (b) the concomitant sensitivities raised by measuring this subjective experience. We discuss the implications of these observations for future research.

Compliant citizens, defiant rebels or neither? Exploring change and complexity in COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and decisions in Bradford, UK: Findings from a follow-up qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have been the central pillar of the public health response to the pandemic, intended to enable us to 'live with Covid'. It is important to understand change and complexity of COVID-19 vaccines attitudes and decisions to maximize uptake through an empathetic lens. OBJECTIVE: To explore the factors that influenced people's COVID-19 vaccines decisions and how their complex attitudes towards the vaccines had changed in an eventful year. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This is a follow-up study that took place in Bradford, UK between October 2021 and January 2022, 1 year after the original study. In-depth phone interviews were conducted with 12 (of the 20 originally interviewed) people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Eleven of the 12 participants interviewed had received both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine and most intended to have a booster dose. Participants described a variety of reasons why they had decided to have the vaccines, including the following: feeling at increased risk at work; protecting family and others in their communities; unrestricted travel and being influenced by the vaccine decisions of family, friends and colleagues. All participants discussed ongoing interaction with COVID-19 misinformation and for some, this meant they were uneasy about their decision to have the vaccine. They described feeling overloaded by and disengaged from COVID-19 information, which they often found contradictory and some felt mistrustful of the UK Government's motives and decisions during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of participants had managed to navigate an overwhelming amount of circulating COVID-19 misinformation and chosen to have two or more COVID-19 vaccines, even if they had been previously said they were unsure. However, these decisions were complicated, demonstrating the continuum of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. This follow-up study underlines that vaccine attitudes are changeable and contextual. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The original study was developed through a rapid community and stakeholder engagement process in 2020. Discussion with the Bradford Council Public Health team and the public through the Bradford COVID-19 Community Insights Group was undertaken in 2021 to identify important priorities for this follow-up study.

Applying the community readiness model to identify and address inequity in end-of-life care in South Asian communities.

BACKGROUND: Individuals from minoritised ethnic backgrounds are less likely than individuals from the dominant ethnic group to access palliative care services and to have documented Advance Care Plans. They are more likely to be admitted to hospital in the last months of life. AIM: To use the Community Readiness Model to identify the barriers that influence how South Asian communities access and use two new palliative care services. DESIGN: The Community Readiness Model is a validated tool that measures the readiness of a community. Key stakeholders were asked to: (i) complete a questionnaire to assess South Asian communities' readiness to engage in advance care planning and, (ii) attend a focus group to explore their views on the communities' understandings of palliative and end-of-life care. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Ten key stakeholders who held a variety of occupations within palliative and end-of-life care services were recruited from the community. FINDINGS: The South Asian communities were found to be at the 'pre-planning' stage of readiness, despite initiatives to improve awareness. The readiness of the health system was found to be limited, with a narrow medical focus during advance care planning, poor integration of voluntary and community services and limited understanding of what people consider a 'good' death. CONCLUSIONS: The Community Readiness Model allowed insight into the South Asian communities' awareness of and readiness (to use) palliative care services. Using the Community Readiness Model before service implementation allowed steps to be taken to avoid widening inequities in access and use of new services.

Cancer, Fertility and Me: Developing and Testing a Novel Fertility Preservation Patient Decision Aid to Support Women at Risk of Losing Their Fertility Because of Cancer Treatment.

Background: Women with a new cancer diagnosis face complex decisions about interventions aiming to preserve their fertility. Decision aids are more effective in supporting decision making than traditional information provision. We describe the development and field testing of a novel patient decision aid designed to support women to make fertility preservation treatment decisions around cancer diagnosis. Methods: A prospective, mixed-method, three stage study involving: 1) co-development of the resource in collaboration with a multi-disciplinary group of key stakeholders including oncology and fertility healthcare professionals and patient partners (n=24), 2) alpha testing with a group of cancer patients who had faced a fertility preservation treatment decision in the past (n=11), and oncology and fertility healthcare professionals and stakeholders (n=14) and, 3) beta testing with women in routine care who had received a recent diagnosis of cancer and were facing a fertility preservation treatment decision (n=41) and their oncology and fertility healthcare professionals (n=3). Ten service users recruited from a closed Breast Cancer Now Facebook group and the support group Cancer and Fertility UK also provided feedback on CFM via an online survey. Results: A 60-page paper prototype of the Cancer, Fertility and Me patient decision aid was initially developed. Alpha testing of the resource found that overall, it was acceptable to cancer patients, healthcare professionals and key stakeholders and it was considered a useful resource to support fertility preservation treatment decision-making. However, the healthcare professionals felt that the length of the patient decision aid, and elements of its content may be a barrier to its use. Subsequently, the prototype was reduced to 40 pages. During beta testing of the shortened version in routine care, women who received the resource described its positive impact on their ability to make fertility preservation decisions and support them at a stressful time. However, practical difficulties emerged which impacted upon its wider dissemination in clinical practice and limited some elements of the evaluation planned. Discussion: Women receiving the decision aid within the cancer treatment pathway found it helped them engage with decisions about fertility preservation, and make better informed, values-based care plans with oncology and fertility teams. More work is needed to address access and implementation of this resource as part of routine oncology care pathways.

Are free school meals failing families? Exploring the relationship between child food insecurity, child mental health and free school meal status during COVID-19: national cross-sectional surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Food insecurity is linked to poor health and well-being in children and rising prevalence rates have been exacerbated by COVID-19. Free school meals (FSM) are considered a critical tool for reducing the adverse effects of poverty but apply a highly restrictive eligibility criteria. This study examined levels of food security and FSM status to support decision-making regarding increasing the current eligibility criteria. DESIGN: Two cross-sectional national surveys administered in August-September 2020 and January-February 2021 were used to examine the impact of COVID-19 on the food experiences of children and young people. SETTING: UK. PARTICIPANTS: 2166 children (aged 7-17 years) and parents/guardians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participant characteristics were described by food security and FSM status; estimated marginal means were calculated to obtain the probability of poor mental health, expressed as children reporting feeling stressed or worried in the past month, by food security status and FSM status. RESULTS: We observed food insecurity among both children who did and did not receive of FSM: 23% of children not receiving FSM were food insecure. Children who were food insecure had a higher probability of poor mental health (31%, 95% CI: 23%, 40%) than children who were food secure (10%, 95% CI: 7%, 14%). Food insecure children receiving FSM had a higher probability of poor mental health (51%, 95% CI: 37%, 65%) than those who were food insecure and not receiving FSM (29%, 95% CI: 19%, 42%). CONCLUSION: Many children experienced food insecurity regardless of whether they received FSM, suggesting the eligibility criteria needs to be widened to prevent overlooking those in need.

Born in Bradford's Better Start (BiBBS) interventional birth cohort study: Interim cohort profile.

Background: The Born in Bradford's Better Start (BiBBS) interventional birth cohort study was designed as an innovative cohort platform for efficient evaluation of early life interventions delivered through the Better Start Bradford programme. There are a growing number of interventional cohorts being implemented internationally. This paper provides an interim analysis of BiBBS in order to share learning about the feasibility and value of this method. Methods: Recruitment began in January 2016 and will complete in December 2023 with a target sample of 5,000 pregnancies. An interim analysis was completed for all pregnancies recruited between January 2016 and November 2019 with an expected due date between 1 st April 2016 and 8 th March 2020. Descriptive statistics were completed on the data. Results: Of 4,823 eligible pregnancies, 2,626 (54%) pregnancies were recruited, resulting in 2,392 mothers and 2,501 children. The sample are representative of the pregnant population (61% Pakistani heritage; 12% White British; 8% other South Asian and 6% Central and Eastern European ethnicity). The majority of participants (84%) live in the lowest decile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation, and many live in vulnerable circumstances. A high proportion (85%) of BiBBS families have engaged in one or more of the Better Start Bradford interventions. Levels of participation varied by the characteristics of the interventions, such as the requirement for active participation and the length of commitment to a programme. Conclusions: We have demonstrated the feasibility of recruiting an interventional cohort that includes seldom heard families from ethnic minority and deprived backgrounds. The high level of uptake of interventions is encouraging for the goal of evaluating the process and outcomes of multiple early life interventions using the innovative interventional cohort approach. BiBBS covers a period before, during and after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic which adds scientific value to the cohort.

Exploring the effects of daily hassles and uplifts on eating behaviour in young adults: The role of daily cortisol levels.

Existing stress-eating research has shown that daily hassles are associated with increases in food intake and that cortisol reactivity to stress has been found to influence the stress-eating relationship. However, the moderating effects of daily cortisol levels (e.g., the cortisol awakening response, CAR) remain unknown. Moreover, recent evidence has shown that daily uplifts, as well as daily hassles, are important in understanding daily influences on eating behaviour. Therefore, in the same study, the current investigation explored the effects of daily hassles and uplifts on eating behaviour and whether these relationships were moderated by mean daily cortisol levels in young female adults. Forty-nine female participants (M age: 19.13 years) recorded the daily hassles and uplifts that they experienced over a 4-day period, together with the between-meal snacks they consumed each day, using an online daily diary. Cortisol samples were provided daily immediately upon waking, at +30 min and +12 h. Mean CAR and mean cortisol levels were calculated across the 4 days. Using multi-level modeling, daily hassles and uplifts were both significantly associated with greater unhealthy snacking. Daily uplifts, but not daily hassles, were also associated with lower healthy snack intake. Higher levels of mean CAR were associated with lower daily healthy snack intake. Moreover, the effects of daily uplifts on healthy snacking were found to be moderated by mean daily cortisol levels, such that participants with the highest levels of mean cortisol consumed less healthy snacks on days when they experienced uplifts. The current study provides novel evidence that mean daily cortisol levels, as well as daily hassles and uplifts, are implicated in daily snack consumption in young female adults. The role of hypothalamic-pituitary adrenal axis activity should be explored further in the context of the daily hassles/uplifts and eating behaviours relationship, in men and in individuals from lower socio-economic status and minority groups.

Exploring the effects of positive and negative emotions on eating behaviours in children and young adults.

It is well established that stress can elicit change in a range of eating behaviours, however, less is known about these effects in children and young adults. In addition, there is a growing interest in investigating the role of positive as well as negative emotions as triggers of food intake in children. Therefore, the current study aimed to explore the relationship between positive and negative emotions and eating behaviour in children (aged 9-10 years old) and young adults together with the moderating effects of eating styles (emotional and external eating). A questionnaire design was used to investigate the effects of positive and negative emotions on snacking responses in children and young adults (children, N = 53, young adults, N = 72). Eating styles were assessed using the Dutch Eating Behaviour Questionnaire. We found that children reported wanting to eat more snacks in response to positive emotions, while young adults reported wanting to eat more snacks in response to negative emotions. Emotional and external eating styles moderated the positive and negative emotions - eating response relationship. Future research should include both positive and negative emotions when examining the influence of stress and emotions on eating, particularly when exploring the triggers of food intake amongst children.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in an ethnically diverse community: descriptive findings from the Born in Bradford study.

Background: The roll out of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are underway in the UK, and ensuring good uptake in vulnerable communities will be critical to reducing hospital admissions and deaths. There is emerging evidence that vaccine hesitancy is higher in ethnic minorities and deprived areas, and that this may be caused by distrust and misinformation in the community. This study aims to understand COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in an ethnically diverse and deprived population of Bradford through the Born in Bradford (BiB) research programme. Methods: Surveys were sent to parents in BiB who had taken part in a previous Covid-19 survey (n=1727). Cross tabulations explored variation by ethnicity and deprivation. Answers to a question asking the main reason for hesitancy was analysed using thematic analysis. Results: 535 (31%) of those invited between 29 th October-9 th December 2020 participated. 48% were White British, 37% Pakistani heritage and 15% from other ethnicities; 46% were from the most deprived quintile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation. 29% of respondents do want a vaccine, 10% do not. The majority had not thought about it (29%) or were unsure (30%). Vaccine hesitancy differed by ethnicity and deprivation: 43% (95% CIs: 37-54%) of White British and 60% (35-81%) in the least deprived areas do want a vaccine, compared to 13% (9-19%) of Pakistani heritage and 20% (15-26%) in the most deprived areas. Reasons for not wanting a vaccine were commonly explained by confusion and distrust which was linked to exposure to misinformation. Conclusions: There is a risk of unequitable roll out of the vaccination programme in the UK with higher vaccine hesitancy in ethnic minorities and those living in deprived areas. There is an urgent need to tackle misinformation that is leading to uncertainty and confusion about the vaccines.

Exploring the effects of daily hassles on eating behaviour in children: The role of cortisol reactivity.

It is well established that stress is positively associated with unhealthy eating behaviours and that cortisol reactivity to stress has been found to influence the stress-eating relationship in adults. However, there is a paucity of research that has explored the daily stress-cortisol-eating relationship amongst children. Therefore, the current study aimed to explore whether the experience of daily stressors was associated with an increase in between-meal snack consumption in children over 7 days. Individual cortisol reactivity to stress in the laboratory was explored as a potential moderator of the stress-eating relationship in the real world. Twenty 8-11 year old children completed the Trier Social Stress Test (for children, TSST-C) during which 4 salivary cortisol samples were taken. Participants subsequently completed a 7-day diary that recorded daily hassles (stressors) and between-meal snack consumption. Using multi-level modelling, the results showed there were no effects of daily hassles or mood on snack consumption. However, there were cross-level interactions, such that individuals who had higher cortisol reactivity to stress in the laboratory were found to consume more total and unhealthy snacks in naturalistic settings on days with high hassles and more negative mood compared to those who exhibited low and moderate cortisol reactivity to stress. This exploratory study provides novel evidence that cortisol reactivity to stress is an important moderator of stress-eating relationship in children and that daily diary approaches are feasible in studies investigating stress and eating in children aged 8-11 years old.

Stress and eating behaviors in children and adolescents: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

It is well established that stress is linked to changes in eating behaviors. Research using adult populations has shown that stress is associated with both increases and decreases in the amount and type of food consumed. However, due to a lack of research reviews, the relationship between stress and eating behaviors in children is unclear. This systematic research review and meta-analysis aimed to identify whether stress is associated with healthy and unhealthy eating behaviors in children aged 8-18 years. Studies were included in the review if they measured stress and included a measure of food consumption. All unique studies retrieved (N = 28,070) were assessed for their eligibility at title, abstract and full text levels. A total of 13 studies were included in the final review and data were analysed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Using random-effects modelling, overall stress was not associated with a change in overall eating behaviors. However, additional analyses indicated stress was associated with unhealthy eating behaviors in both younger (Hedge's g = 0.283, p < 0.001) and older (Hedge's g = 0.274, p = 0.001) children. In contrast, stress was not associated with healthy eating behaviors in younger children (Hedge's g = 0.093, p = 0.156), but was negatively associated with healthy eating behaviors in older children (Hedge's g = -0.384, p < 0.001). The current findings are concerning as they suggest the impact of stress on unhealthy eating may begin as early as 8 or 9 years old. Future research ought to investigate further the role of psychological, behavioral and endocrine factors in the development of stress-related eating in children.