Review finding | Confidence in the evidence | Explanation of confidence in the evidence | Contributing studies |
---|---|---|---|
Source of information | |||
E6: Parents receiving feedback letters plus additional resources had little or no difference in the way they perceive receiving help to reduce their child’s risk of overweight compared to parents receiving a standard feedback letter. | Moderate | Downgraded by 1 level due to unclear risk of bias | Bailey-Davies 2017 [50] |
Content of information | |||
E7: Parents receiving feedback letters plus additional resources had little or no difference in the way they perceive receiving the information/resources that help them understand their child’s weight status compared to parents receiving a standard feedback letter. | Moderate | Downgraded by 1 level due to unclear risk of bias | Bailey-Davies 2017 [50] |
E8: Parents receiving feedback letters plus additional resources had little or no difference in their perception that they are receiving useful weight status information compared to parents receiving a standard feedback letter. | Low | Downgraded by 2 levels because of unclear risk of bias and imprecision. | Bailey-Davies 2017 [50] |
Susceptibility of being overweight | |||
E9: It is uncertain whether parents receiving feedback letters plus additional resources improved parent’s ability to classify their child’s weight status compared to parents receiving a standard feedback letter. | Very low | Downgraded by 3 levels due to study design, risk of bias and imprecision | |
Perceived severity of being overweight | |||
E10: It is uncertain whether parents receiving feedback letters plus additional resources improved parent’s ability to recognise the risks of obesity compared to parents receiving a standard feedback letter. | Very low | Downgraded by 3 levels due to study design, risk of bias and imprecision | |
Cues to action | |||
E11: It is uncertain whether parents receiving feedback letters plus additional resources contacted a healthcare provider compared to parents receiving a standard feedback letter. | Low | Downgraded by 2 levels because of unclear risk of bias and imprecision. | Bailey-Davies 2017 [50] |