ArticlePublic health nutrition2021
'
Article 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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nutritional knowledge and practices of low-income women during pregnancy: a qualitative study in two Oaxacan cities.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Understanding Breastfeeding Practices in Tennessee: Goals, Duration, and Reasons for Discontinuation.Journal of Appalachian health · 2025Article
- Commercial milk formula marketing entry points: setting the course of infant and young child feeding trajectories.BMC public health · 2024Article
- English Translation of the Breastfeeding Knowledge Survey for Pediatricians.Journal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association · 2024Article
- Healthcare professionals and commercial milk formula recommendations in the urban Mexican context.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Discrepancies in infant feeding recommendations between grandmothers and healthcare providers in rural Mexico.International breastfeeding journal · 2022Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAs Mexico continues to develop, an epidemiological and nutritional transition has led to an increase in infant formula use in its rural and indigenous communities. Our objective was to determine the social and cultural factors that influence the use of formula in such populations in Central Mexico.
designQualitative study using a data collection instrument based on the socio-ecological framework.
settingTwo rural and indigenous communities in Central Mexico.
participantsMothers, fathers, grandparents and healthcare providers.
resultsBreast-feeding was favoured in both communities; however, several cultural traditions hindered exclusive breast-feeding. As these communities became more developed, emerging ideas of modernity led to negative connotations about breast-feeding and many mothers began to view formula as a complement for breast-feeding. Formula was seen as a convenient solution for breast pain, insufficient milk and body image. Healthcare providers promoted the use of formula through their own beliefs, information, communication and conflicts of interest with formula industry representatives. The recent social and economic changes in these communities combined with the increased advertising and availability of breast milk substitutes have facilitated the preference for formula.
conclusionsWomen in rural, indigenous communities in Central Mexico are increasingly using formula. Efforts at the policy and institutional levels are needed to protect mothers and their children from the detrimental consequences of unregulated formula promotion and the formula culture that it brings with it.
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.