Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22422915›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2012

A serial qualitative interview study of infant feeding experiences: idealism meets realism.

Pat Hoddinott, Leone C A Craig, Jane Britten, Rhona M McInnes

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 70 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Newborn Feeding Knowledge and Attitudes among Medical Students.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Pat HoddinottHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Leone C A Craig
Jane Britten
Rhona M McInnes

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the infant feeding experiences of women and their significant others from pregnancy until 6 months after birth to establish what would make a difference.

designQualitative serial interview study.

settingTwo health boards in Scotland.

participants72 of 541 invited pregnant women volunteered. 220 interviews approximately every 4 weeks with 36 women, 26 partners, eight maternal mothers, one sister and two health professionals took place.

resultsThe overarching theme was a clash between overt or covert infant feeding idealism and the reality experienced. This is manifest as pivotal points where families perceive that the only solution that will restore family well-being is to stop breast feeding or introduce solids. Immediate family well-being is the overriding goal rather than theoretical longer term health benefits. Feeding education is perceived as unrealistic, overly technical and rules based which can undermine women's confidence. Unanimously families would prefer the balance to shift away from antenatal theory towards more help immediately after birth and at 3-4 months when solids are being considered. Family-orientated interactive discussions are valued above breastfeeding-centred checklist style encounters.

conclusionsAdopting idealistic global policy goals like exclusive breast feeding until 6 months as individual goals for women is unhelpful. More achievable incremental goals are recommended. Using a proactive family-centred narrative approach to feeding care might enable pivotal points to be anticipated and resolved. More attention to the diverse values, meanings and emotions around infant feeding within families could help to reconcile health ideals with reality.

Identifiers

PMID22422915
PMCPMC3307036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.