Table I.

Characteristics of studies included in the present analysis

Study	N	Research tool	Age of study population [years]	Survey region	Study days
Rogalska-Niedźwiedź et al. [24]	394	Estimated food record for intake, made by parents. Analyzed using Dieta 2.0 software	4	The whole country	7
Gawęcki et al. [25]	180	Food frequency questionnaire. Results estimated using FOOD software	5–6	Bydgoszcz, Dąbrowa Górnicza, Gębice	10
Sadowska and Krzymuska [26]	78	Estimated food record for intake, made by parents and another one filled in by kindergarten staff. Total daily food portions per child were compared. Analysis performed using Dietetyk 2006 software	4–6	Szczecin	3
Sochacka-Tatara et al. [27]	313	Estimated food record for intake, made by parents, analyzed using Nutri-Day software	3	Kraków	3
Sadowska et al. [28]	105	Food frequency questionnaire filled in by parents and another one filled in by kindergarten staff. Total daily food portions per child were compared. Analysis performed using Dietetyk 2006 software	4–6	Szczecin	3
Starbała et al. [29]	31	Estimated food records for menus (2 weekdays (70% preschool diet + 30% home diet) and 1 day of the weekend). Diets analysed using Dietetyk software	4–6	Warsaw	3
Kolarzyk et al. [30]	324	Food frequency questionnaire filled in by parents	3.5–7.5	Kraków	NR
Kostecka [31]	200	Food frequency questionnairea,b filled in by parents, assessed in Dieta 5.0 software	3–5	Lublin	3
Merkiel [32]	120	Food frequency questionnairea,b filled in by parents, assessed in Dieta 4.0 software	6	Nowy Sącz	3
Kostecka [33]	350	Food frequency questionnairea,b (including 1 day of the weekend) filled in by parents, assessed in Dieta 5.0 application	4–6	South-eastern Poland	3

^aProprietary questionnaire.

^bThree-day timetable recording the type and quantity of products eaten by the child; filled in by parents and/or kindergarten staff; NR – not reported.