Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29307590›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics2018

Timing of Introduction of Complementary Foods to US Infants, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2009-2014.

Chloe M Barrera, Heather C Hamner, Cria G Perrine, Kelley S Scanlon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Timing of Introduction of Complementary Foods - United States, 2016-2018.MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Complementary feeding: Should baby be leading the way?Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2022
    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

4 authors.

Chloe M Barrera
Heather C Hamner
Cria G Perrine
Kelley S Scanlon

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough there has been inconsistency in recommendations regarding the optimal time for introducing complementary foods, most experts agree that introduction should not occur before 4 months. Despite recommendations, studies suggest that 20% to 40% of US infants are introduced to foods at younger than 4 months. Previous studies focused on the introduction of solid foods and are not nationally representative.

objectiveOur aims were to provide a nationally representative estimate of the timing of introduction of complementary foods and to describe predictors of early (<4 months) introduction.

designWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 2009-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data.

participantsThe study included 1,482 children aged 6 to 36 months.

main outcome measuresTiming of first introduction to complementary foods (anything other than breast milk or formula) was analyzed. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Prevalence estimates of first introduction to complementary foods are presented by month. Logistic regression was used to assess characteristics associated with early (<4 months) introduction.

resultsIn this sample, 16.3% of US infants were introduced to complementary foods at <4 months, 38.3% between 4 and <6 months, 32.5% between 6 and <7 months, and 12.9% at ≥7 months of age. In unadjusted analyses, early introduction varied by breastfeeding status; race/Hispanic origin; Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children participation; and maternal age. In adjusted analyses, only breastfeeding status remained significant; infants who never breastfed or stopped at <4 months were more likely (odds ratio 2.27; 95% CI 1.62 to 3.18) to be introduced to complementary foods early than infants who breastfed ≥4 months.

conclusionsDespite using a broader definition of complementary foods, this analysis found a lower prevalence of early introduction in this nationally representative sample than previous studies that included only solids. However, many young children were still introduced to complementary foods earlier than recommended. Strategies to support caregivers to adhere to infant feeding guidelines may be needed.

Indexed as

Infant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaTime FactorsBreast FeedingChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFood AssistanceHumansInfantInfant FoodMaleMothersNutrition SurveysUnited StatesComplementary feedingInfant feedingInfant feeding decisionsNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveysSolid food introduction

Identifiers

PMID29307590
PMCPMC5828913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.