SynthesisMaternal & child nutrition2005
Weight monitoring of breastfed babies in the UK - centile charts, scales and weighing frequency.
Synthesis in Maternal & child nutrition, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Weight monitoring of breastfed babies in the United Kingdom--interpreting, explaining and intervening.Maternal & child nutrition · 2006Pooled it
- Primary healthcare professionals' role in monitoring infant growth: A scoping review.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2024Article
- A meta-ethnographic synthesis of women's experience of breastfeeding.Maternal & child nutrition · 2010Review
- Feeding by numbers: an ethnographic study of how breastfeeding women understand their babies' weight charts.International breastfeeding journal · 2006Article
- Breastfeeding support for adolescent mothers: similarities and differences in the approach of midwives and qualified breastfeeding supporters.International breastfeeding journal · 2006Article
- Baby growth needs proper re-evaluation.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Weighing infants during their first 6 months is an important focus of growth monitoring and a common activity of child health care services worldwide. In these same months, health workers provide support for breastfeeding and promote continued exclusive breastfeeding. The literature on the practice of weighing breastfed babies is reviewed, as it applies to the United Kingdom. The shape of the growth curves for breastfed babies differs from that of formula-fed infants and also from centile charts previously in use. The World Health Organization commitment to the production of a new growth reference has generated discussion of the implications of charts in use. The country-specific charts in use in the UK are examined and the data used to construct them discussed with reference to clinical use for breastfed infants. Recent UK discussions on charts, as well as on the frequency of routine weighing for babies in the community are considered, and the available evidence on the accuracy of weighing in practice is noted. The choices made in constructing different charts; the physical condition of scales and their use in practice have implications for plotted growth. This paper aims to present a wide range of evidence available in this area in order to encourage debate on practice. A companion paper will discuss issues of interpretation, conveying information to parents, and interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.