ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
(Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The infant feeding methods promoted by South African Instagram influencers in relation to crying and sleeping, 2018-2020: a retrospective digital ethnography.International breastfeeding journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first six months is optimal for child health, it remains low globally. Breastmilk substitutes (BMS) marketing undermines breastfeeding. In 2012, South Africa introduced Regulation 991, which prohibits marketing BMS products for infants below 6 months. Our study aimed to explore if and how BMS products were presented in South African parenting magazines post-R991. We applied a mixed-methods cross-sectional content analysis design, analyzing all 2018 issues of two popular parenting magazines. We descriptively analyzed quantitative codes, derived from an a priori framework, and conducted qualitative content analysis on a subset of texts and images. We found there was no overt marketing of BMS to parents with infants below 6 months. However, BMS advertisements were placed next to articles about young infants, and vague wording and images were ways by which BMS companies may indirectly benefit. Medical experts in both magazines promoted the introduction of solids before six months. To conclude, while BMS companies in South Africa were abiding by R991 by not overtly advertising BMS in parental print media, their influence persists. Continued monitoring of print media as well as other channels is advisable. This study may be of interest to countries considering stronger regulations of BMS advertising.
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.