Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32977790›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2020

Prevalence and associated factors of prelacteal feeding among neonates admitted to neonatal intensive care units, North central Ethiopia, 2019.

Wubet Alebachew Bayih, Demewoz Kefale Mekonen, Solomon Demis Kebede

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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.

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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wubet Alebachew BayihDepartment of Pediatrics and Neonatal Health Nursing, College of Health Sciences, Debre Tabor University, P.O.BOX 272, Debre Tabor, Ethiopia. wubetalebachew@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1439-4402
Demewoz Kefale MekonenDepartment of Pediatrics and Neonatal Health Nursing, College of Health Sciences, Debre Tabor University, P.O.BOX 272, Debre Tabor, Ethiopia.
Solomon Demis KebedeDepartment of Pediatrics and Neonatal Health Nursing, College of Health Sciences, Debre Tabor University, P.O.BOX 272, Debre Tabor, Ethiopia.
Debre Tabor University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrelacteal feeding compromises the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding, thereby increasing neonatal malnutrition, infection and mortality. About 26% of the Ethiopian neonates are given prelacteal feeds and nearly 48% of whom are attributed to Amhara region. Besides, prior Ethiopian studies have shown significance of the problem at different community settings in the country. However, the prevalence and associated factors of prelacteal feeding among neonatal admissions has been overlooked in the country in general and in the study area in particular. Therefore, this study was aimed to assess the prevalence and associated factors of prelacteal feeding among neonatal admissions in the study setting.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 321 mother-neonate pairs admitted to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) of Debre Tabor General Hospital between September 2018 and February 2019. Every fourth mother neonate pair was included to the study. Multivariable logistic regressions were fitted to find out adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of factors associated with pre-lacteal feeding.

resultsThe prevalence of prelacteal feeding was 20.2% [95% CI: 15.31-26.75%]. Plain water was the most common prelacteal food (32.3%). Factors associated with prelacteal feeding include rural residence (AOR = 4.07, 95% CI: 1.30, 12.81), primiparity (AOR = 4.50, 95% CI: 1.30-12.81), less than four ANC visits (AOR = 4.71, 95% CI: 1.23-17.84), spousal accompany to ANC (AOR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.05-0.75), home delivery (AOR = 5.94, 95% CI: 1.80-19.67), having twin newborns (AOR = 6.69, 95% CI: 1.25, 35.91) and maternal belief on the purported advantages of prelacteal feeding (AOR = 2.74, 95% CI: 2.09-25.39). CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: One out of five sick neonates was given prelacteal feeds. Twin neonates, home delivered neonates, rural neonates, neonates born to primiparous mothers, neonates delivered from mothers who had less than four ANC visits, neonates born to mothers who weren't accompanied by their spouse during ANC and those born to mothers who believe on the purported advantages of prelacteal feeding had higher odds of receiving prelacteal feeds. Therefore, mothers of these vulnerable neonates should be provided with more emphasis about counseling of infant and young child feeding practice during their stay at NICU.

Indexed as

Breast FeedingIntensive Care Units, NeonatalChildCross-Sectional StudiesEthiopiaFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancyPrevalenceEthiopiaFactorsNeonatesPrelactealPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID32977790
PMCPMC7519479
OpenAlexW3088277429

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.