SynthesisMaternal & child nutrition2021
A systematic review of economic evaluations for donor human milk versus standard feeding in infants.
Synthesis in Maternal & child nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Economic evaluations of human milk for very preterm infants: a systematic review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Donor human milk for preventing necrotising enterocolitis in very preterm or very low-birthweight infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled 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
- Adverse Events Following Cow's Milk-Derived Human Milk Fortification: A Nationwide Human Milk Bank Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Impact of processing techniques on donor human milk: a multi-omics and bioinformatics scoping review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Bridging the Milk Gap: Integrating a Human Milk Bank-Blood Bank Model to Reinforce Lactation Support and Neonatal Care.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Cost of operating a human milk bank in the UK: a microcosting analysis.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2025Article
- Understanding modifiable barriers to human milk donation in the United Kingdom.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025Article
- Acceptability of donated breast milk among pregnant women in selected hospitals in central Uganda: a cross-sectional study.International breastfeeding journal · 2023Article
- Exploring Human Milk, Nutrition, Growth, and Breastfeeding Rates at Discharge(HUMMINGBIRD Study): a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.BMJ paediatrics open · 2023Article
- Receiving screened donor human milk for their infant supports parental wellbeing: a mixed-methods study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reviews on the cost/outcome of donor human milk (DHM) for infants requiring care in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) setting have been undertaken. However, the cost-effectiveness evidence is unclear. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of published full economic evaluations of DHM versus standard feeding in infants in neonatal care with the aim of undertaking a narrative synthesis of the cost-effectiveness evidence and critical appraisal of the methods used. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) and PROSPERO databases were searched. Studies were included if they were full economic evaluations (model-based or trial-based), the participants were infants in neonatal units requiring nutritional support, the intervention was DHM and the comparator was any standard feeding option. There were no restrictions on outcome measures. Two authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, assessed quality and cross-checked results, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Information extracted focused on study context, and economic evaluation methods and results. Of 2861 studies, seven were included. Six (86%) studies originated from high-income countries. Four (57%) of the studies were model-based. Although we could not directly compare the different studies, due to the heterogenous nature of health and economic parameters used in the studies, all DHM interventions indicated cost-effective or cost saving results. This review suggests that economic evaluation of DHM interventions is an expanding area of research. Although these interventions show promise, future economic evaluations of DHM interventions need to explicitly provide more details on long-term costs and consequences.
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.