Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34614129›Full record

ArticleRevista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo2021

Brazilian health professionals' perception about the Baby-Led Weaning (BLW) method for complementary feeding: an exploratory study.

Felipe Silva Neves, Bruna Miranda Romano, Angélica Atala Lombelo Campos, Camila Almeida Pavam, Renata Maria Souza Oliveira, Ana Paula Carlos Cândido, Michele Pereira Netto

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. What is the best method for introducing complementary feeding?Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Felipe Silva NevesUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3294-5979
Bruna Miranda RomanoUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3389-9898
Angélica Atala Lombelo CamposUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8406-6370
Camila Almeida PavamUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2605-570X
Renata Maria Souza OliveiraUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0274-6602
Ana Paula Carlos CândidoUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1481-5927
Michele Pereira NettoUniversidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0017-6578
Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe Brazilian health professionals' perception about the Baby-Led Weaning (BLW) method use for complementary feeding.

methodsCross-sectional, descriptive study including 458 health professionals graduated in Nursing, Speech Therapy, Medicine, Nutrition or Dentistry and working in Pediatrics, being directly or indirectly involved with pediatric nutrition. We used a convenience non-probability sampling. The questionnaire applied to participants addressed demographic characteristics, academic degree, workplace, knowledge about clinical practice and perceptions about the possible advantages of the BLW method.

resultsParticipants had a mean age of 34.5±8.5 years, 64.6% of them working in Southeast Brazil and 65.3% being nutritionists. Most participants reported being acquainted with the BLW method (82.0%). Regarding clinical practice, 38.3% mentioned having recommended the BLW some times, 37.5% often and 20.5% always. Most participants fully agreed that the BLW method could have advantages for babies, for example, having them more likely to share family meals, facilitating adaptation to food flavors and consistencies, enhancing chewing and favoring the development of motor skills. On the other hand, important disagreements were also expressed regarding the BLW convenience and the possibility to create less concerns or anxiety in parents.

conclusionsThe BLW method reported as advantageous, but disagreements were also raised, probably because scientific evidences on the suject are scarse. Further investigation is needed so we can better understand the risks and benefits and health care professionals can feel effectively assisted to offer support and advice to parents and caretakers.

Indexed as

Infant BehaviorInfant FoodAdultBrazilChildCross-Sectional StudiesFeeding BehaviorHealth PersonnelHumansInfantInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaPerceptionWeaning

Identifiers

PMID34614129
PMCPMC8543847
OpenAlexW3201822507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.