Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36225180›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of women's health2022

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breastfeeding Support Services and Women's Experiences of Breastfeeding: A Review.

Welma Lubbe, Hannakaisa Niela-Vilén, Gill Thomson, Elina Botha

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Exploring exclusive breastfeeding readiness: experiences of first-time mothers in Lusaka, Zambia.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Welma LubbeSchool of Nursing Science/NuMIQ Research Focus Area, Faculty of Health Sciences, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
Hannakaisa Niela-VilénUniversity of Turku, Department of Nursing Science, Turku, Finland.
Gill ThomsonSchool of Community Health and Midwifery, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Elina BothaSchool of Social Services and Health Care, Tampere University of Applied Sciences, Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-5279-7395
North-West University · ZATampere University of Applied Sciences · FIUniversity of Lancashire · GBUniversity of Turku · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breastfeeding support services and continuation rates. Methods: Electronic searches were undertaken in seven databases: Academic Search Complete, Springer Nature Journals, CINAHL Medline, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, Masterfile premier, and SocINDEX. Publications following the COVID-19 pandemic between January 2020 and March 2022 were searched for using the following keywords: impact or effect or influence and breastfeeding support and breastfeeding continuation and COVID-19 or coronavirus. Fifteen studies were included for investigation and extracted to identify seven themes related to breastfeeding support during COVID-19. Results: Factors which impacted breastfeeding support during the COVID-19 pandemic included separation, lack of skin-to-skin contact, insufficient support, online breastfeeding support, the impact of the pandemic on breastfeeding rates and experiences, fears of the pandemic, and the need for additional support. The pandemic mostly influenced breastfeeding support negatively, with a small exception occurring where some mothers experienced lockdown as positive since it protected the mother-infant dyad from unwanted visitors. Virtual breastfeeding support was introduced in many contexts; however, practitioners and mothers reported that this could not replace the need for face-to-face support. Conclusion: Breastfeeding is a lifesaving intervention, especially in the face of a disruption such as a pandemic. This work highlights the need for clear, consistent, and evidence-based information about risks, and for key practices to be maintained including not separating mothers and infants, promoting skin-to-skin contact, and ensuring availability of high-quality breastfeeding support.

Indexed as

breastfeeding supportcoronavirusCOVID-19effectpandemic

Identifiers

PMID36225180
PMCPMC9549794
OpenAlexW4306168275

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.