Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24358603›Full record

ArticleThe practising midwife2013

Goals, dilemmas and assumptions in infant feeding education and support.

Heather Trickey, Mary Newburn

Abstract readComment
PubMed
In one paragraph

Article in The practising midwife, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Heather TrickeyNCT, Cardiff University.
Mary NewburnNCT.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research unwrapped is a popular series to help readers make sense of published research by undertaking a detailed appraisal of a published research article in a careful and considered manner. In doing so we can advance our knowledge and understanding of a research topic and apply it to our practice. This process is designed to assess the usefulness of the evidence in terms of decision making and application to practice. It is important that the appraisal is critical and that midwives are evaluative in their reading of research. Somewhat unusually, this month's paper is unwrapped by the authors (Trickey and Newburn 2012). Clearly insiders, they would not claim that their 'unwrapping' is neutral. Their proximity to the subject matter may prevent them from seeing things that strike the more distanced observer. However, Trickey and Newburn believe the insider perspective allows them to convey something of the experience of facilitating shifts in thinking using an innovative and participative methodology. They are openly keen to draw attention to the implications for midwives and others.

Indexed as

Breast FeedingGoalsInfant FormulaFemaleHumansMothers

Identifiers

PMID24358603

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.