Lee 2001.

Methods	Study design: prospective cohort study. Analyses methods for cohorts: girls divided into 2 groups (LF group 20‐30%TE; HF group > 30%TE). The GLM, ANOVA conducted to compare food group intakes, weight status and maternal feeding practices between groups. How were missing data handled? NR. Number of study contacts: baseline (aged 5 years) and after 2 years (aged 7 years) (not clearly reported). Period of follow‐up (total period of observation): 2 years. Period of recruitment: NR. Sample size justification adequately described? No. Sampling method: convenience sample. Girls aged 5‐years and their mothers who were participating in a longitudinal project investigating development of controls of food intake and dieting of girls. Families recruited using flyers and newspaper advertisements. Families with age‐eligible girls (total number NR) within 5‐county radius also received mailings and follow‐up telephone calls. Study objective: to compare girls' diets that had 30% of energy from fat with those meeting the AAP recommendations to maintain dietary fat intake at 30% of energy. Study population: healthy 5‐year‐old girls and their mothers.
Participants	Baseline characteristics (reported for 1 overall group) Age (eligible for inclusion in years): 5. Sex: 100% girls. Ethnicity: 99% white. Education: mother's education (years): 15 (SD NR). Income: household income > USD 35,000: LF group 73.5%; HF group 70.4%. Pubertal stage: NR. Parental BMI: NR. Child total energy (kJ): overall (n = 192) 6407.79 (SD 355.14); LF group (n = 84) 6238.34 (SD 293.28); HF group (n = 108) 6539.59 (SD 342.95); P = NS. Child total fat: overall (n = 192) 52.75 g (SD 7.73); 31%TE; LF group (n = 84) 46 g (SD 4.58); 27.77%TE; HF group (n = 108) 58 g (SD 5.2); 33.39%TE; P < 0.05. Child total protein: overall (n = 192) 53 g (SD 9.27); 13.8%TE; LF group (n = 84) 53 g (SD 9.17), 14.22%TE; HF group (n = 108) 53 g (SD 9.35); 13.56%TE; P = NS. Child total CHO: overall (n = 192) 217.25 g (SD 58.76), 56.7%TE; LF group (n = 84) 233 g (SD 14.66), 62.51%TE; HF group (n = 108) 205 g (SD 14.55), 52.46%TE; P < 0.05. Child physical activity: NR. Child physical inactivity or screen time or both: NR. Child CVD risk (excluding fatness): NR. Child body fatness: BMI (kg/m2): overall (n = 192) 15.91 (SD 1.98); LF group (n = 84) 15.8 (SD 1.83); HF group (n = 108): 16.0 (SD 2.08); P = NS. Included criteria: 5‐year old girls living with both biological parents. Excluded criteria: severe food allergies or chronic medical problems affecting food intake, and dietary restrictions involving animal products. Brief description of participants: healthy 5‐ to 7‐year‐old white girls in Pennsylvania, USA. Total number completed in cohort study: 192. Total number enrolled in cohort study: 197.
Interventions	Description of exposure for cohorts Time span: 2 years. Dietary assessment method used: 24‐hour recall. Frequency of dietary assessments: single multiple 24‐hour recall at 5 years (baseline). 3 dietary recalls performed during a 2‐week period (2 weekdays and 1 weekend day randomly selected). See Table 9; Table 10; Table 11; Table 12; Table 13; Table 14; Table 15; Table 16; Table 17; Table 18 for details of total fat intake exposure per outcome.
Outcomes	BMI BMI (kg/m2, 2 years' change). Skinfold thickness Sum of 2 skinfolds (triceps, subscapular) (mm).
Identification	Sponsorship source: National Institutes of Health and the National Dairy Council. Country: USA. Setting: household. Comments: NA. Author's name: Yoonna Lee. Institution: Human Development and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University. Email: llb15@psu.edu. Declaration of interests: no. Study ID: Lee 2001. Type of record: journal article.
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Were adequate outcome data for cohorts available? All outcomes	Low risk	Authors stated that 5 girls (2.5% over 2 years) were excluded because of a dietary misreporting (fat intake < 20%).
Was there matching of less‐exposed and more‐exposed participants for prognostic factors associated with outcome or were relevant statistical adjustments done? All outcomes	High risk	Matching NR. Authors did not control for any prognostic factors in analyses.
Did the exposures between groups differ in components other than only total fat? All outcomes	Unclear risk	NR.
Can we be confident in the assessment of outcomes? All outcomes	Low risk	Standardised methods used at baseline and follow‐up (weight, height, skinfold thickness measurements).
Can we be confident in the assessment of exposure? All outcomes	High risk	Single assessment of dietary intake at baseline (3 × 24‐hour recalls during 2‐week period).
Can we be confident in the assessment of presence or absence of prognostic factors? All outcomes	Low risk	No data reported in relation to prognostic factors.
Was selection of less‐exposed and more‐exposed groups from the same population? All outcomes	Low risk	All participants of 1 cohort study.