ReviewBMC pediatrics2019
An economic analysis of human milk supplementation for very low birth weight babies in the USA.
Review in BMC pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Economic evaluations of human milk for very preterm infants: a systematic review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of economic evaluations for donor human milk versus standard feeding in infants.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Pooled it
- Effect of Group Antenatal Care on Breastfeeding Knowledge and Practices Among Pregnant Women in Ghana: Findings from a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Trial
- Towards a Multi-sectoral Approach to Population Health: A Scoping Review of Cross-sectoral Evaluations of Health Interventions.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Review
- Factors Associated with Inequities in Donor Milk Bank Access Among Different Hospitals.Breastfeeding medicine : the official journal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine · 2024Article
- Quality, outcome, and cost of care provided to very low birth weight infants in California.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Article
- Implementing an exclusive human milk diet for preterm infants: real-world experience in diverse NICUs.BMC pediatrics · 2023Review
- Dilemmas in human milk fortification.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023Review
- Article
- Examining the Relationship between Cost and Quality of Care in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and Beyond.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Cost-effectiveness of probiotics for necrotizing enterocolitis prevention in very low birth weight infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2020Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn exclusive human milk diet (EHMD) using human milk based products (pre-term formula and fortifiers) has been shown to lead to significant clinical benefits for very low birth weight (VLBW) babies (below 1250 g). This is expensive relative to diets that include cow's milk based products, but preliminary economic analyses have shown that the costs are more than offset by a reduction in the cost of neonatal care. However, these economic analyses have not completely assessed the economic implications of EHMD feeding, as they have not considered the range of outcomes affected by it.
methodsWe conducted an economic analysis of EHMD compared to usual practice of care amongst VLBW babies in the US, which is to include cow's milk based products when required. Costs were evaluated from the perspective of the health care payer, with societal costs considered in sensitivity analyses.
resultsAn EHMD substantially reduces mortality and improves other health outcomes, as well as generating substantial cost savings of $16,309 per infant by reducing adverse clinical events. Cost savings increase to $117,239 per infant when wider societal costs are included.
conclusionsAn EHMD is dominant in cost-effectiveness terms, that is it is both cost-saving and clinically beneficial, for VLBW babies in a US-based setting.
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.