Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30159001›Full record

ArticleInternational breastfeeding journal2018

Evidence of inflated exclusive breastfeeding estimates from a clinical trial in Bangladesh.

Thomas J Roberts, Yana E Hoy-Schulz, Kaniz Jannat, Julie Parsonnet

Registry-linked trialOpen 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. It is linked to trial NCT01899378 (Safety and Efficacy of Probiotics in Bangladeshi Infants), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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.

NCT01899378 phase1completednot on this map

Safety and Efficacy of Probiotics in Bangladeshi Infants

TypeinterventionalSponsorStanford UniversityRan2013 to 2014Enrolled160ConditionsHealthyArmsLactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938, Bifidobacterium longum infantis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Thomas J Roberts1Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0840-1875
Yana E Hoy-Schulz2Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, USA.
Kaniz Jannat3Environmental Intervention Unit, Infectious Disease Division, International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Julie Parsonnet2Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, USA.
International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research · BDMassachusetts General Hospital · USStanford Health Care · USStanford Medicine · US

Funding

Stanford Center for Clinical and Translational Education and Research (SCCTER)UL1UL1RR025744 · NCRR · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI GREENBERG, HARRY BERNARD · 2008 to 2011
$22.4M
Global Epidemiology of Infectious DiseasesT32AI052073 · NIAID · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Angelle Desiree LaBeaud, Stephen Patrick Luby · 2003 to 2026
$4.2M
Spectrum Stanford Center for Clinical and Translational Research and EducationTL1TR001084 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CULLEN, MARK RICHARD, GREENBERG, HARRY BERNARD · 2013 to 2017
$1.1M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001084NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025744NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI052073
6 · The paper itself

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

Breastfeeding promotionEpidemiologyExclusive breastfeedingInfant nutritionMeasurement error

Identifiers

PMID30159001
PMCPMC6106757
OpenAlexW2888278929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.