SynthesisNutrients2021
Breastfeeding in Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review on Prevalence and Potential Benefits.
Synthesis in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Breastfeeding, growth, and lung disease in the first 3 years of life in children with cystic fibrosis.Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society · 2025Article
- "It's Like You're Feeding Your Child Twice": Barriers and Facilitators to Human Milk Feeding Children With Cystic Fibrosis.Pediatric pulmonology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breastfeeding (BF) is considered the normative standard of feeding for all infants. However, the impact of BF in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) is not completely defined. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to evaluate BF prevalence in the CF population and its impact on anthropometric and pulmonary outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library for original articles published in English up to 4 December 2020 that report the prevalence of BF and/or any measure of association between BF and anthropometric or pulmonary outcomes. Nine observational studies were identified (six retrospective cohort studies, one prospective cohort study, one survey and one case-control study within a retrospective cohort). The BF rate in CF patients is lower than that of the healthy population (approximately 50-60% of infants were breastfed at any time). The benefits in anthropometric outcomes of BF for >2 months in this at-risk population are unclear. A few relatively small studies suggest a potential benefit of BF in reducing lung infections, although data are inconsistent. The currently available data are insufficient to draw definite conclusions on the benefits of exclusive BF in anthropometric and pulmonary outcomes in CF. Clinical trials evaluating well-defined BF promotion interventions are 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.