Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29649245›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Women's preferences for alternative financial incentive schemes for breastfeeding: A discrete choice experiment.

Frauke Becker, Nana Anokye, Esther W de Bekker-Grob, Ailish Higgins, Clare Relton, Mark Strong, Julia Fox-Rushby

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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 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
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

7 authors.

Frauke BeckerHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1175-3932
Nana AnokyeHealth Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom.
Esther W de Bekker-GrobSection of Health Technology Assessment and Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ailish HigginsHealth Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom.
Clare ReltonSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Mark StrongSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Julia Fox-RushbyHealth Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/J000434/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing breastfeeding rates have been associated with reductions in disease in babies and mothers as well as in related costs. 'Nourishing Start for Health (NoSH)', a financial incentive scheme has been proposed as a potentially effective way to increase both the number of mothers breastfeeding and duration of breastfeeding.

aimsTo establish women's relative preferences for different aspects of a financial incentive scheme for breastfeeding and to identify importance of scheme characteristics on probability on participation in an incentive scheme.

methodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) obtained information on alternative specifications of the NoSH scheme designed to promote continued breastfeeding duration until at least 6 weeks after birth. Four attributes framed alternative scheme designs: value of the incentive; minimum breastfeeding duration required to receive incentive; method of verifying breastfeeding; type of incentive. Three versions of the DCE questionnaire, each containing 8 different choice sets, provided 24 choice sets for analysis. The questionnaire was mailed to 2,531 women in the South Yorkshire Cohort (SYC) aged 16-45 years in IMD quintiles 3-5. The analytic approach considered conditional and mixed effects logistic models to account for preference heterogeneity that may be associated with a variation in effects mediated by respondents' characteristics.

results564 women completed the questionnaire and a response rate of 22% was achieved. Most of the included attributes were found to affect utility and therefore the probability to participate in the incentive scheme. Higher rewards were preferred, although the type of incentive significantly affected women's preferences on average. We found evidence for preference heterogeneity based on individual characteristics that mediated preferences for an incentive scheme.Conclusions Although participants' opinion in our sample was mixed, financial incentives for breastfeeding may be an acceptable and effective instrument to change behaviour. However, individual characteristics could mediate the effect and should therefore be considered when developing and targeting future interventions.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorMothersAdolescentAdultAttitude to HealthBreast FeedingFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMiddle AgedMotivationQualitative ResearchRewardSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29649245
PMCPMC5896913

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.