Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29467812›Full record

ArticleInternational breastfeeding journal2018

Prelacteal feeding and associated factors among newborns in rural Sidama, south Ethiopia: a community based cross-sectional survey.

Nana Chea, Anteneh Asefa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International breastfeeding journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nana Chea1School of Public and Environmental Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Hawassa University, Hawassa, Ethiopia.
Anteneh Asefa1School of Public and Environmental Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Hawassa University, Hawassa, Ethiopia.
Hawassa University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe practice of giving prelacteal feeds deprive a newborn of valuable nutrients and expose the newborn to risks of infection. Despite its negative health outcomes, prelacteal feeding prevails in Ethiopia. Therefore, the current study was undertaken to assess the prevalence of prelacteal feeding practices and its associated factors in a rural community in south Ethiopia.

methodsWe conducted a community based cross-sectional study of 597 mothers of children aged less than six months. Mothers were selected using a multistage cluster sampling technique from Hawela Tula, a rural catchment under Hawassa City Administration. Newborns exposed to any foods, substances or drinks other than human milk before the initiation of breastfeeding or during the first three days of birth were regarded as receiving prelacteal feeds. Descriptive summaries were done to present the main findings; bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were undertaken to identify variables associated with prelacteal feeding practices.

resultsAmong the total infants, 25.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.5%, 27.5%) were found to be exposed to prelacteal feeds. Boiled water (36.8%) and fresh butter (32.2%) were the top two prelacteal foods. The prevalence of prelacteal feeding was higher among infants whose mothers are housewives, and among infants born to mothers aged between 21 and 34 years. Almost two-third (64.3%) of mothers who exposed their newborn to prelacteal feeds did so with advice from their parents. Mothers who had poor knowledge on breastfeeding were nine times more likely to practice prelacteal feeding compared to those with good knowledge (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 8.9, 95% CI 4.2, 18.7). Lack of knowledge on the risks associated with prelacteal feeding (AOR 6.8; 95% CI 2.6, 17.8) and misconceptions about breastfeeding (AOR 8.1; 95% CI 3.9, 16.6) were associated with prelacteal feeding. However, mothers' place of delivery and attendance at breastfeeding counseling sessions showed no association with the practice of prelacteal feeding.

conclusionsPrelacteal feeding is commonly practiced in the study area. Raising women's awareness on the consequences of prelacteal feeding is warranted. Involving parents of women when promoting optimal infant feeding practices should be emphasized.

Indexed as

BreastfeedingFeedingMothersNewbornsPrelacteal

Identifiers

PMID29467812
PMCPMC5819158
OpenAlexW2797717226

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.