Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26420339›Full record

ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2015

Infant Feeding Websites and Apps: A Systematic Assessment of Quality and Content.

Sarah Taki, Karen J Campbell, Catherine G Russell, Rosalind Elliott, Rachel Laws, Elizabeth Denney-Wilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Criteria for assessing the quality of mHealth apps: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Improving Breastfeeding by Empowering Mothers in Vietnam: A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Mobile App.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Provider perspectives on equity in use of mobile health autism screening tools.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Mobile and online consumer tools to screen for autism do not promote equity.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sarah TakiFaculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia. sarah.b.taki@student.uts.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7228-8993

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternet websites and smartphone apps have become a popular resource to guide parents in their children's feeding and nutrition. Given the diverse range of websites and apps on infant feeding, the quality of information in these resources should be assessed to identify whether consumers have access to credible and reliable information.

objectiveThis systematic analysis provides perspectives on the information available about infant feeding on websites and smartphone apps.

methodsA systematic analysis was conducted to assess the quality, comprehensibility, suitability, and readability of websites and apps on infant feeding using a developed tool. Google and Bing were used to search for websites from Australia, while the App Store for iOS and Google Play for Android were used to search for apps. Specified key words including baby feeding, breast feeding, formula feeding and introducing solids were used to assess websites and apps addressing feeding advice. Criteria for assessing the accuracy of the content were developed using the Australian Infant Feeding Guidelines.

resultsA total of 600 websites and 2884 apps were screened, and 44 websites and 46 apps met the selection criteria and were analyzed. Most of the websites (26/44) and apps (43/46) were noncommercial, some websites (10/44) and 1 app were commercial and there were 8 government websites; 2 apps had university endorsement. The majority of the websites and apps were rated poor quality. There were two websites that had 100% coverage of information compared to those rated as fair or poor that had low coverage. Two-thirds of the websites (65%) and almost half of the apps (47%) had a readability level above the 8th grade level.

conclusionsThe findings of this unique analysis highlight the potential for website and app developers to merge user requirements with evidence-based content to ensure that information on infant feeding is of high quality. There are currently no apps available to consumers that address a variety of infant feeding topics. To keep up with the rapid turnover of the evolving technology, health professionals need to consider developing an app that will provide consumers with a credible and reliable source of information about infant feeding, using quality assessment tools and evidence-based content.

Indexed as

applicationshealth informationinfant feedingInternetqualityreadabilitysuitability

Identifiers

PMID26420339
PMCPMC4704960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.