SynthesisPublic health nutrition2021
Workplace programmes for supporting breast-feeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Public health nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of care intervention with a health education form for breastfeeding on breast distension, pain, and lactation in postpartum mothers.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Trial
- Maternal factors associated with exclusive breastfeeding failure: a community-based cross-sectional study in the north of Iran.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2026Article
- Exploring thematic dimensions of breast pumping discussions in an online community using large language models and multiple correspondence analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Observational
- Effectiveness of workplace interventions for health promotion.The Lancet. Public health · 2025Review
- It Takes a Village: How Community-Based Peer Support for Breastfeeding Bolsters Lactation Prevalence Among Black Mississippians on the Gulf Coast.Pediatric reports · 2024Article
- Maternal employment characteristics as a structural social determinant of breastfeeding after return to work in the European Region: a scoping review.International breastfeeding journal · 2024Article
- What makes a city 'breastfeeding-friendly'? A scoping review of indicators of a breastfeeding-friendly city.Maternal & child nutrition · 2024Article
- Changes in Policy Supports for Healthy Food Retailers, Farmers Markets, and Breastfeeding Among US Municipalities, 2014-2021: National Survey of Community-Based Policy and Environmental Supports for Healthy Eating and Active Living (CBS-HEAL).Preventing chronic disease · 2023Article
- Assessing the Impact of Workforce Nutrition Programmes on Nutrition, Health and Business Outcomes: A Review of the Global Evidence and Future Research Agenda.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Access to Workplace Supports is Positively Associated with Exclusive Breastfeeding among Formally Employed Mothers in Kenya.The Journal of nutrition · 2023Article
- An analysis of actors participating in the design and implementation of workplace breastfeeding interventions in Mexico using the NetMap analysis approach.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Mothers' Attitudes Towards Breastfeeding in Terms of Health Safety and Professional Lactation Education: A National Survey of Women.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- What works to protect, promote and support breastfeeding on a large scale: A review of reviews.Maternal & child nutrition · 2022Review
- Attitudes and experiences of employed women when combining exclusive breastfeeding and work: A qualitative study among office workers in Northern Ethiopia.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Article
- How do breastfeeding workplace interventions work?: a realist review.International journal for equity in health · 2021Review
- Clinical significance and main parameters promoting the breast‑feeding strategy (Review).Medicine internationalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo critically review the literature regarding workplace breast-feeding interventions and to assess their impact on breast-feeding indicators.
designA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Electronic searches for workplace intervention studies to support breast-feeding, without restriction on language or study design, were performed in PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, Business Source Complete, ProQuest-Sociology and ProQuest-Social Science to 13 April 2020. A meta-analysis of the pooled effect of the programmes on breast-feeding indicators was conducted.
resultsThe search identified 10 215 articles; fourteen studies across eighteen publications met eligibility criteria. Programmes were delivered in the USA (n 10), Turkey (n 2), Thailand (n 1) or Taiwan (n 1). There were no randomised controlled trials. The pooled OR for exclusive breast-feeding at 3 or 6 months for participants v. non-participants of three non-randomised controlled studies was 3·21 (95 % CI 1·70, 6·06, I2 = 22 %). Despite high heterogeneity, other pooled outcomes were consistently in a positive direction with acceptable CI. Pooled mean duration of breast-feeding for five single-arm studies was 9·16 months (95 % CI 8·25, 10·07). Pooled proportion of breast-feeding at 6 months for six single-arm studies was 0·76 (95 % CI 0·66, 0·84) and breast-feeding at 12 months for three single-arm studies was 0·41 (95 % CI 0·22, 0·62). Most programmes were targeted at mothers; two were targeted at expectant fathers.
conclusionsWorkplace programmes may be effective in promoting breast-feeding among employed mothers and partners of employed fathers. However, no randomised controlled trials were identified, and better-quality research on workplace interventions to improve breast-feeding is needed.
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.