Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35997020›Full record

ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2022

Exclusive breastfeeding: Measurement to match the global recommendation.

Silvia Alayón, Veronica Varela, Altrena Mukuria-Ashe, Jeniece Alvey, Erin Milner, Sarah Pedersen, Jennifer Yourkavitch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Breastfeeding Measurement - Considerations When Measuring Exclusive Breastfeeding.Journal of human lactation : official journal of International Lactation Consultant Association · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Silvia AlayónUSAID Advancing Nutrition, Arlington, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8023-5023
Veronica VarelaUSAID Advancing Nutrition, Arlington, Virginia, USA.
Altrena Mukuria-AsheUSAID Advancing Nutrition, Arlington, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6232-3698
Jeniece AlveyPublic Health Institute/USAID Global Health Technical Professionals, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Erin MilnerPublic Health Institute/USAID Sustaining Technical and Analytical Resources, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Sarah PedersenCredence/USAID Global Health Technical Professionals, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Jennifer YourkavitchUSAID Advancing Nutrition, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) recommend exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first 6 months of life. To estimate the proportion of infants that are exclusively breastfed, many agencies use the point prevalence of EBF among infants currently 0-5.9 months of age, as recommended by WHO and UNICEF. This measure tends to overestimate the percentage of infants that are exclusively breastfed for the entire recommended period. We compared five methods of measuring EBF, using data from three large-scale cross-sectional surveys. The five methods were: the WHO/UNICEF recommended method (EBF-24H); an estimate of EBF for 6 months, using the 24-h recall among infants 4-5.9 and 6-7.9 months (EBF-24H-Pul); a since birth recall (EBF-SB); an estimate of EBF for 6 months, using the since-birth recall among infants 4-5.9 and 6-7.9 months (EBF-SB-Pul); a retrospective measure of EBF collected from infants 6-11.9 months, based on the age of introduction of liquids and foods (EBF-AI). EBF-24H-Pul and EBF-SB-Pul produced lower estimates of EBF than other measures, while also aligning better with the WHO recommendation, but may be difficult to estimate from multipurpose surveys due to sample size limitations. The EBF-AI method produced estimates between these, aligns well with the WHO recommendation and can be easily collected in large-scale household surveys. Additional validation of the EBF-24-Pul, EBF-SB-Pul, and EBF-AI methods is recommended to understand how accurately they measure EBF for the recommended 6-month period.

Indexed as

Breast FeedingChildCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfantPrevalenceRetrospective StudiesWorld Health Organizationbreastfeedingbreastfeeding durationinfant and child nutritioninfant feedingmeasurementmonitoring and evaluationsurvey methods

Identifiers

PMID35997020
PMCPMC9480953

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.