ArticleNutrients2021
An Online Cross-Sectional Survey of Complementary Feeding Practices during the COVID-19 Restrictions in Poland.
Article in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This cross-sectional online survey performed in Poland aimed to improve understanding of how COVID-19 pandemic restrictions affected complementary feeding practices among parents of infants aged 4 to 12 months. Self-selected parents were recruited through the internet. The anonymous questionnaire was opened during two intervals during COVID-19 restrictions. The primary outcome was an assessment of sources of information and infant feeding practices in the context of COVID-19 restrictions. Data from 6934 responders (92.2% mothers) were analyzed. Most responders received information from multiple sources, with other parents, family members, or friends being the most frequently reported (48.6%), followed by webinars and experts' recommendations (40.8%). COVID-19 restrictions largely did not impact the method of feeding, changes in feeding patterns, or complementary feeding introduction, although the latter was more likely to be impacted in families with average versus the best financial situations. Multivariate logistic regression analysis also most consistently showed that parents with a tertiary education and living in a city above 500 k were at higher odds of using webinars/experts' recommendations, internet/apps, and professional expert guides and lower odds of claiming no need to deepen knowledge. This study clarifies major issues associated with complementary feeding practices during the implementation of COVID-19 restrictions in Poland.
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.