Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30806025›Full record

ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2019

Solid advice: Complementary feeding experiences among disadvantaged parents in two countries.

Louise Tully, Virginia Allen-Walker, Eleni Spyreli, Sheena McHugh, Jayne V Woodside, Patricia M Kearney, Michelle C McKinley, Moira Dean, Colette Kelly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Maternal Experiences with Discussing Complementary Feeding in Primary Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors.

Louise TullyHealth Promotion Research Centre, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-0257-0408
Virginia Allen-WalkerNutrition Group, Centre for Public Health, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Eleni SpyreliSchool of Biological Sciences, Institute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Sheena McHughSchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Jayne V WoodsideNutrition Group, Centre for Public Health, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Patricia M KearneySchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Michelle C McKinleyNutrition Group, Centre for Public Health, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Moira DeanSchool of Biological Sciences, Institute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Colette KellyHealth Promotion Research Centre, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7598-0160

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The initiation of complementary feeding (CF; introducing infants to food/drink other than milk) is recommended close to 6 months and not before 4 months of age. Low socio-economic status (SES) is a determinant of nonadherence to CF recommendations, but there is an evidence gap around reasons for nonadherence among these parents. This study investigated knowledge, attitudes, and practices of disadvantaged families (in terms of SES and social support) and use of guidance for CF, in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Parents of infants aged 3-14 months were recruited via community groups. Semistructured focus groups aided by vignettes were used. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach. Nineteen focus groups took place with parents (n = 83). A range of factors influence parents when introducing solids. Sources of guidance extend to family, friends, the internet, and commercial resources. Parents experience uncertainty and anxiety during this time, driven by lack of knowledge and conflicting advice. Five major themes were identified: (a) more guidance that is accessible, timely, and respectfully needed; (b) the challenge of choosing safe, nutritious food; (c) "everybody has an opinion"; (d) feelings of inadequacy, embarrassment, and guilt; and (e) decisions are ultimately based on individual circumstances. CF advice should be culturally appropriate, practical, and empowering, emphasising the rationale behind updates to recommendations and consequences of nonadherence. Future training of health professionals for delivery of CF advice and guidance should consider these findings. Compliance with CF recommendations is influenced by health professionals, the wider family, and the commercial baby-food sector.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaWeaningAdultDecision MakingFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInfantIrelandMaleNarrationNorthern IrelandParentsSocial ClassSurveys and Questionnairescomplementary feedingcomplementary foodsdisadvantageinfant and child nutritioninfant feedingweaning

Identifiers

PMID30806025
PMCPMC7199028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.