SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2022
Qualitative evidence syntheses of attitudes and preferences to inform guidelines on infant feeding in the context of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) transmission risk.
Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast-feeding holds considerable potential to reduce infant mortality. Feeding choices, already complex, take on additional complexity against a backdrop of the risk of transmissible Ebola Virus. This review describes the factors that influence infant feeding and attitudes of pregnant women, mothers, family members and health practitioners, policy makers and providers (midwives) concerning infant feeding when there is a risk of Mother-to-Child (MTC) transmission of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD). METHODOLOGY: A systematic review of qualitative studies identified through rigorous searches of thirteen online databases and additional citation searches of included studies was undertaken. Search terms included breast-feeding, breast-feeding, infant feeding; Ebola; and qualitative, interview(s) and findings. Independent extraction of data by two reviewers using predefined extraction forms. Studies were assessed using the CASP Qualitative checklist. PRINCIPAL
findings5219 references were screened. 38 references related specifically to Ebola, and five papers met the inclusion criteria with data gathered from two settings: Guinea and Sierra Leone. The EVD outbreak had a significant impact on beliefs, attitudes, and resources to support infant feeding practices negatively affecting the nutritional status of children. The evidence from these studies highlight the need for guidance and appropriate psychosocial support need to be available to mothers who display symptoms and become infected and to front-line staff who are giving advice. Communities need to be engaged because stigma and fear may hinder uptake of appropriate interventions. The EVD outbreak caused multi-level system disruption akin to that seen following a natural disaster, meaning that logistics and coordination are critical and need adequate resourcing. Food production and distribution, and malnutrition screening are also disrupted and thereby compounding compromised nutritional status. The limited number of relevant studies highlights the need for further primary research, particularly in translation of messages to local settings.
conclusionsAn EVD outbreak causes multi-level disruption that negatively impacts infant feeding and child care practices. Negative impacts have multiple causes and successful planning for Ebola outbreaks requires that nutrition of infants and young children is a priority. Lessons from the Ebola pandemic have wider applicability to other pandemic contexts including Covid-19.
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.