Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29489841›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Australian general practitioners' knowledge, attitudes and practices towards breastfeeding.

Orit Holtzman, Tim Usherwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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.

Orit HoltzmanDepartment of General Practice, Sydney Medical School Westmead, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3490-502X
Tim UsherwoodDepartment of General Practice, Sydney Medical School Westmead, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore the knowledge, attitudes and practices of established general practitioners (GPs) in relation to breastfeeding. 10 GPs in the Australian Nepean Blue Mountains Health District were interviewed and the interviews transcribed and analyzed thematically. Emergent themes from each interview were identified and then compared between and across the 10 interviews. Five themes emerged following the analysis: breastfeeding knowledge and training; attitudes towards breastfeeding; GPs' role in relation to breast feeding; GPs' practices; influence of male gender. All the GPs interviewed had positive attitudes towards breastfeeding, however they were often lacking in knowledge and conviction to be able to provide strong support to women during their breastfeeding journey. Some reported ambivalence in their encouragement of breastfeeding due to their desire to maintain a good relationship with women who chose not to feed this way. Nine of the GPs had little or no formal breastfeeding training and relied mainly on personal experience. Their clinics did not provide formal breastfeeding support including a written breastfeeding friendly policy and most GPs were not proactive in creating such an environment. We hope that the results from this study will assist in developing breastfeeding policies and professional education to support GPs in this role.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAustraliaBreast FeedingFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumans

Identifiers

PMID29489841
PMCPMC5830034

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.