Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22161404›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011

Early additional food and fluids for healthy breastfed full-term infants.

Genevieve E Becker, Sharon Remmington, Tracey Remmington

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Early additional food and fluids for healthy breastfed full-term infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Newborn physiological immaturity: a concept analysis.Advances in neonatal care : official journal of the National Association of Neonatal Nurses · 2015
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Genevieve E BeckerBEST Services, 2 Kylemore Park, Taylor's Hill, Galway, Ireland.
Sharon Remmington
Tracey Remmington
Building Engineering and Science Talent · USLiverpool Womens NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWidespread recommendations from health organisations encourage exclusive breastfeeding for six months. However the addition of other fluids or foods before six months is common practice in many countries and communities. This practice suggests perceived benefits of early supplementation or lack of awareness of the possible risks.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of supplementation for full-term healthy breastfed infants and to examine the timing and type of supplementation. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 March 2011) and reference lists of all relevant retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in infants under six months of age comparing exclusive breastfeeding versus breastfeeding with any additional food or fluids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected the trials; three extracted data and assessed risk of bias. MAIN

resultsWe included six trials (814 infants). Two trials in the early days after birth that reported data did not indicate that giving additional fluids was beneficial. For duration of breastfeeding, there was a significant difference favouring exclusive breastfeeding up to and including week 20 (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.99), indicating that supplements may contribute to reducing the duration.For infant morbidity (three trials), one newborn trial found a statistically, but not clinically, significant difference in temperature at 72 hours (MD 0.10 degrees, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.19), and that serum glucose levels were higher in glucose supplemented infants in the first 24 hours, though not at 48 hours (MD -0.24mmol/l, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.03). Two trials with four- to six-month-old infants did not indicate any benefit to supplemented infants to 26 weeks nor any risks related to morbidity or weight change.None of the trials reported on the remaining primary outcomes, infant mortality or physiological jaundice. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe were unable to fully assess the benefits or harms of supplementation or to determine the impact from timing and type of supplementation .We found no benefit to newborn infants and possible negative effects on the duration of breastfeeding from the brief use of additional water or glucose water. For infants at four to six months, we found no benefit from additional foods nor any risks related to morbidity or weight change. Future studies should examine the longer term effects on infants and mothers, though randomising infants to receive supplements without medical need may be considered unethical.We found no evidence for disagreement with the recommendation of international health associations that exclusive breastfeeding should be recommended for healthy infants for the first six months.

Indexed as

Breast FeedingDietary SupplementsInfant FoodDietary CarbohydratesDrinking WaterGlucoseHumansInfantRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime FactorsDietary CarbohydratesDrinking WaterGlucose

Identifiers

PMID22161404
OpenAlexW4234080480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.