ArticleInternational breastfeeding journal2021
One-week recall period gives a more accurate estimate of exclusive breastfeeding practice than 24-h recall among infants younger than six months of age.
Article in International breastfeeding journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- WHO exclusive breastfeeding recommendation and cognitive development in Germany.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Poor agreement between methods used in population studies to estimate the volume of human milk consumed: a Bland-Altman analysis.International breastfeeding journal · 2026Observational
- A mixed-methods investigation of infant and young child feeding practices in rural Ethiopia: integrating insights from surveys, direct observation, and qualitative research.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- The global burden of suboptimal breastfeeding from 1990 to 2019: results and insights of the Global Burden of Disease.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Breastfeeding Measurement - Considerations When Measuring Exclusive Breastfeeding.Journal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association · 2025Article
- Social Desirability Bias in a Randomized Controlled Trial That Included Breastfeeding Promotion in Western Kenya.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Article
- Exclusive breastfeeding practices and its determinants in Indian infants: findings from the National Family Health Surveys-4 and 5.International breastfeeding journal · 2023Article
- Challenging the utility of 24-hour recall of exclusive breast feeding in Japan.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Comparative Assessment of Exclusive Breastfeeding Rates From 24-Hour Recall and Since Birth Methods in Southwestern Pennsylvania Using Ecological Momentary Assessment.Journal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association · 2023Article
- Trends of breastfeeding indicators in Brazil from 1996 to 2019 and the gaps to achieve the WHO/UNICEF 2030 targets.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Estimating the prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding with data from household surveys: Measurement issues and options.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization recommends a 24-h recall period to estimate breastfeeding practice of mothers of infants aged younger than six-months. Though 24-h recall was preferred for its low recall bias and for practical reasons, it can overestimate exclusive breastfeeding practice (EBF). Validating this indicator will help account for the deviation from the true estimate. This prospective cohort study measured accuracy of the 24-h recall method and validates a week recall as an alternative approach for use in a small sample population.
methodThe study was conducted from March to April 2018 involving 408 mother-infant pairs living in Butajira Health and Demographic Surveillance Site (HDSS), Southern Ethiopia. Participants were prospectively followed for 14 consecutive days; where their breastfeeding practice in the past 24 h was measured daily. Exclusive breastfeeding prevalence estimate obtained using the 24-h recall method and recall periods spanning a varying number of days (short period recalls) was compared against the cumulative of the responses from a prospectively measured repeated 24-h recalls over the course of 14 days. McNemar statistics was used to assess statistical significance of the difference in the EBF prevalence estimates of the single 24-h recall and the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive values were calculated to determine the level of accuracy. Receiver Operating Characteristics curve was used to measure the difference in performance between the two methods.
resultThe highest prevalence (71.4%) of exclusive breastfeeding practice was estimated using the single 24-h recall method whereas the lowest breastfeeding practice (47.1%) was obtained from a cumulative of 14 repeated 24-h recalls. A week recall (a recall over 7 days' period), resulted in the smallest discrepancy in estimate (7.1%) as compared to cumulative estimate of 14 repeated 24-h recalls. Comparing against our reference standard, a week recall had 96.7% sensitivity and 83.5% specificity in estimating exclusive breastfeeding practice.
conclusionsUsing single 24-h recall method overestimated exclusive breastfeeding prevalence. However, a week recall gave an estimate close to the estimate from the standard method. A week recall has a potential to balance the tradeoff between the accuracy of EBF estimates and the resource implication of using multiple prospective measurements that have a proven superior accuracy.
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.