Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35209893›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

An exploration of pregnant women and mothers' attitudes, perceptions and experiences of formula feeding and formula marketing, and the factors that influence decision-making about infant feeding in South Africa.

Christiane Horwood, Silondile Luthuli, Catherine Pereira-Kotze, Lyn Haskins, Gillian Kingston, Sithembile Dlamini-Nqeketo, Gilbert Tshitaudzi, Tanya Doherty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors.

Christiane HorwoodCentre for Rural Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa. horwoodc@ukzn.ac.za.
Silondile LuthuliCentre for Rural Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Catherine Pereira-KotzeSchool of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
Lyn HaskinsCentre for Rural Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Gillian KingstonM&C Saatchi World Services, London, UK.
Sithembile Dlamini-NqeketoWorld Health Organization, Pretoria, South Africa.
Gilbert TshitaudziUNICEF, Pretoria, South Africa.
Tanya DohertySchool of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite strong evidence showing the lifelong benefits of breastfeeding for mothers and children, global breastfeeding practices remain poor. The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes is an internationally agreed code of practice, adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981, to regulate promotion of commercial formula, and is supported by legislation in many countries. However, marketing of formula remains widespread and contributes to mother's decisions to formula feed. We present South African data from a multi-country, mixed-methods study exploring women's decision-making about infant feeding and how this was influenced by exposure to formula marketing.

methodsUsing a consumer-based marketing approach, focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with pregnant women and mothers of children aged between 0 and 18 months in two urban sites in South Africa. Participants were purposively selected according to their child's age, infant feeding practices and socioeconomic status. Ten FGDs were conducted during February 2020 with a total of 69 participants. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data with NVivo v.12 software.

resultsDespite being encouraged by health professionals to breastfeed and intending to do so, many mothers chose to give formula in the early weeks and months of their child's life. Mothers reported breastfeeding challenges as the most frequent reason for initiating infant formula, stating that family members and health professionals recommended formula to solve these challenges. Although participants described few advertisements for infant formula, advertisements for 'growing-up' formulas for older children were widespread and promoted brand recognition. Mothers experienced other marketing approaches including attractive packaging and shop displays of infant formula, and obtained information from social media and online mothers' groups, which influenced their choice of formula brand. Mothers reported strong brand loyalty derived from previous experiences and recommendations. Health professionals frequently recommended formula, including recommending specific formula brands and specialist formulas.

conclusionGlobal formula companies use multifaceted marketing methods to promote a strong narrative portraying formula feeding as a positive lifestyle choice. Positive, coordinated efforts are required to counter pro-formula messaging and change the narrative to support breastfeeding as an aspirational choice. In particular, health professionals must stop supporting the formula industry.

Indexed as

MothersPregnant PeopleAdolescentAttitudeBreast FeedingChildFemaleHumansInfantInfant FormulaInfant, NewbornMarketingPregnancySouth AfricaBreast-milk substitutesChild healthFormula feedingGlobal healthInfant feeding practicesInternational code of marketing of breast-milk substitutesMarketingSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID35209893
PMCPMC8872897

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.