The Screening Tool of Feeding Problems applied to children (STEP-CHILD): Psychometric characteristics and associations with child and parent variables
Abstract
The present study evaluated the 23-item Screening Tool for Feeding Problems (STEP; Matson & Kuhn, 2001) with a sample of children referred to a hospital-based feeding clinic to examine the scale's psychometric characteristics and then demonstrate how a children's revision of the STEP, the STEP-CHILD is associated with child and parent variables. Participants included 142 children (95 boys, 47 girls; mean age = 61.4 months; 43 with autism, 51 with other special needs, 48 with no special needs). Children ranged in age from 24 months to 18 years. Factor analysis revealed a 15-item STEP-CHILD with six subscales of child feeding problems: chewing problems, rapid eating, food refusal, food selectivity, vomiting, and stealing food. Mediation analysis documented that "overly permissive" actions by parents (such as infrequent insistence on eating during meals, or frequent preparation of Special Meals for children different than the family meal) explained over 34% of the links between children's feeding problems and poor weight and diet outcomes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Difficulties with feeding and eating in children and young people with autism can be further compounded by sensory sensitivities, idiosyncratic behaviours, social anxieties, and difficulties with communication.
“Since difficulties with feeding and eating in children and young people with autism can be further compounded by sensory sensitivities, idiosyncratic behaviours, social anxieties, and difficulties with communication, 12,48,93”
From Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder and Severe Food Selectivity in Children and Young People with Autism: A Scoping Review (2022) · cites this paper as [48]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 22 · Cited by 90
- Authors
- Seiverling, L., Hendy, H. M., & Williams, K.
- Affiliations
- Westchester Institute for Human Development (US)
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Seiverling, Laura
- Venue
- Research in Developmental Disabilities
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-05
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1122-1129
- ISSN
- 0891-4222 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2080254377
- Cited by
- 90
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Research in Developmental Disabilities (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Keywords
- child feeding problems, psychometric validation, factor structure, autism spectrum disorder, children with special needs, parental feeding practices, permissive parenting, picky eating, food refusal, vomiting, weight outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Autistic Disorder, Child Rearing, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Parent-Child Relations, Parents, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Reproducibility of Results, Child Nutrition Disorders, Body Mass Index, Feeding and Eating Disorders of Childhood
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
