Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35414555›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

They push their products through me: health professionals' perspectives on and exposure to marketing of commercial milk formula in Cape Town and Johannesburg, South Africa - a qualitative study.

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

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

Tanya DohertyHealth Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Tygerberg, South Africa tanya.doherty@mrc.ac.za.ORCID 0000-0003-1592-0080
Catherine Jane Pereira-KotzeSchool of Public Health, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3061-6511
Silondile LuthuliCentre for Rural Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3078-526X
Lyn HaskinsCentre for Rural Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Gillian KingstonKing's College London, London, UK.
Sithembile Dlamini-NqeketoWorld Health Organization South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.
Gilbert TshitaudziUNICEF, Pretoria, South Africa.
Chistiane HorwoodCentre for Rural Health, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand the views of public and private sector health professionals on commercial milk formula, to describe their exposure to companies that market commercial milk formula within their workplaces and to describe their awareness of South African (SA) regulations.

designA qualitative study consisting of semistructured interviews.

settingThe study was conducted in Cape Town and Johannesburg, SA.

participantsForty health professionals who had regular contact with pregnant or postnatal women were interviewed between February 2020 and February 2021.

resultsAnalysis of the interviews revealed six themes. Health professionals in the private sector reported frequent contact with industry representatives with over two-thirds reporting exposure to industry representatives to present products, provide training or sponsor educational activities. Participants held strong opinions regarding the equivalency of breastfeeding to commercial milk formula citing information from industry representatives and product packaging. Health professionals were very knowledgeable on so-called formulas for special medical purposes and these were valued as solutions to infant feeding challenges. Of the 40 health professionals interviewed, less than half (19) had ever heard of the SA regulation related to marketing of breast milk substitutes (R991).

conclusionsThis study demonstrates clearly that health professionals, particularly in the private sector, are exposed to and promote the use of commercial milk formula among SA women. The findings of this study should be used to catalyse policy responses, social movements, consumer and professional association action to strengthen monitoring and enforcement of the Code regulations in order to protect breastfeeding and support the optimal health and well-being of the population.

Indexed as

MilkMilk SubstitutesAnimalsBreast FeedingFemaleHumansInfantMarketingPregnancySouth Africacommunity child healthhuman resource managementnutrition

Identifiers

PMID35414555
PMCPMC9006797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.