ArticleJournal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association2012
Identifying breastfeeding-sensitive conditions by expert consensus.
Article in Journal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInfant feeding-related health outcomes need to be consistently defined prior to inclusion in health services research.
objectiveTo categorize conditions common in infants under 12 months old by their association with breastfeeding for use as outcome measures in a randomized, controlled trial of breastfeeding promotion.
methodsA modified Delphi consensus method synthesized opinions of 13 physician experts on breastfeeding's association with ICD-9 infant diagnosis codes derived from literature review and medical center experience. A pilot round and 2 subsequent Delphi rounds were used. For the first round, consensus was achieved when more than 80% of experts agreed on a classification for a particular condition, with a predetermined level of certainty based on a 7-point Likert scale. For the second round, consensus was achieved when a majority of experts agreed on the classification from Round 1.
resultsAn initial 68 diagnosis codes were identified for evaluation by the expert panel. After a pilot round, the codes were refined and condensed, which resulted in 38 diagnoses for categorization into 1 of 3 categories: (1) breastfeeding protects against the condition; (2) breastfeeding may cause or worsen the condition; and (3) breastfeeding is unrelated to the condition. At the conclusion of the process, consensus was achieved on the classification of 31 conditions, and 7 conditions remained unclassified because of a lack of consensus.
conclusionsThis study provides a list of conditions common in infants under 12 months of age classified based on relationship to infant feeding method and validated by expert consensus. These conditions, based on readily available insurance claims data, contribute to the standardization of outcome measures used for health services research related to breastfeeding promotion.
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.