ArticleMaternal and child health journal2017
Examining the Washington State Breastfeeding-Friendly Policy Development Process Using the Advocacy Coalition Framework.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining advocacy in public health: a scoping review to inform policy, training, and equity-oriented action.International journal for equity in health · 2026Article
- Advocating for Paid Maternity Leave and Workplace Lactation Policy Reform and Implementation: Lessons Learned From Indonesia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Vietnam.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Breastfeeding promotion is increasingly recognized as a key public health strategy. Policies can promote breastfeeding by creating supportive environments and addressing challenges. In 2014, the Washington State legislature considered bills to create a voluntary recognition system for breastfeeding-friendly hospitals, clinics, worksites and childcare settings. These Breastfeeding-Friendly Washington (BFW) bills (SB 6298 and HB 2329) did not pass. Methods The purpose of this case study was to analyze the policy development process for the BFW bills using the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders in the state policy process, and document review. We used thematic analysis to identify deductive and inductive themes. Results Though all policy actors indicated general support for breastfeeding, two main coalitions (proponents and opponents) diverged in their support of the BFW bills as policy solutions to address barriers to breastfeeding. We conducted 29 interviews with mainly bill proponents, and 54 documents confirmed data about bill opponents. Proponents supported the bills given increasingly strong evidence of breastfeeding's benefits and that public policy could address environmental challenges to breastfeeding. Opponents saw the bills as government overreach into the private matter of choosing to breastfeed. Opposition to the bills came late in the session, and proponents felt opponents' messaging misconstrued the intent of the legislation. Conclusions for Practice Key learnings for developing breastfeeding-friendly state policies include analyzing differences between proponents' and opponents' beliefs, framing advocacy messages beyond individuals and health, expanding the coalition outside of traditional health entities, and anticipating the opposition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27497602What 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.