ArticleInternational breastfeeding journal2018
Evidence of inflated exclusive breastfeeding estimates from a clinical trial in Bangladesh.
Article in International breastfeeding journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01899378 (Safety and Efficacy of Probiotics in Bangladeshi Infants), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Safety and Efficacy of Probiotics in Bangladeshi Infants
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maternal knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding breastfeeding and mastitis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Exclusive breastfeeding: Measurement to match the global recommendation.Maternal & child nutrition · 2022Article
- Effect of a baby-friendly workplace support intervention on exclusive breastfeeding in Kenya.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Article
- One-week recall period gives a more accurate estimate of exclusive breastfeeding practice than 24-h recall among infants younger than six months of age.International breastfeeding journal · 2021Article
- Exclusive breastfeeding in first-time mothers in rural Kenya: a longitudinal observational study of feeding patterns in the first six months of life.International breastfeeding journal · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Suboptimal breastfeeding is a major cause of infant morbidity and mortality across the world. Inconsistent data has hampered quantification of this practice, however, limiting breastfeeding promotion efforts. As part of a clinical trial in Dhaka, Bangladesh, data was collected on breastfeeding patterns among 125 infants. Infants were ages 4 to 12 weeks (mean = 8.05, SD = 2.13) at the time of enrollment, and breastfeeding data were collected at 24 study visits during a twelve-week period. Breastfeeding status was assessed using the WHO-recommended "current status" (24-h recall) method. These data were used to calculate two measures: a longitudinal estimate of exclusive breastfeeding since birth and a simulated cross-sectional prevalence to approximate common data collection methods. Infants were then ranked based on their breastfeeding status at all study visits and grouped into quartiles and compared using hospitalization data recorded for all infants as part of the original study. These data showed large differences in estimates of exclusive breastfeeding behaviors when assessed longitudinally (8.8% exclusive breastfeeding) vs. calculating a cross-sectional prevalence (56.2% exclusive breastfeeding). Additionally, when infants were grouped by quartile of breastfeeding behavior and matched with hospitalization records, it was found that infants in the lowest quartile of breastfeeding behaviors were significantly more likely to be hospitalized than infants in the highest quartile. These results provide further evidence that current breastfeeding epidemiology studies may overestimate rates of exclusive breastfeeding. They also provide further evidence to support the significant infant health benefits from breastfeeding promotion.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01899378. Registered July 10, 2013.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.