ArticleBMJ open2023
Missing data and other challenges in assessing inappropriate marketing of baby foods in the Russian Federation: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dismantling structural inequities in global prevention of childhood and adolescent non-communicable diseases.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Evaluating alignment of UK commercial baby food products with the WHO nutrient and promotion profile model.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Benchmarking the nutrient composition and labelling practices of dry or instant cereals for older infants and young children across seven Southeast Asian countries.Maternal & child nutrition · 2023Article
- Integrating care across non-communicable diseases and maternal and child health.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe used the WHO draft nutrient profile model (NPM) to evaluate baby foods targeted at infants and young children (IYC) aged 6-36 months in the Russian Federation to assess their suitability for marketing.
designA cross-sectional study in Moscow (Russian Federation).
settingNutrition information of baby food was primarily collected from retailer websites, with some complementary data from physical stores. Both specialist stores for IYC and general supermarkets were included.
participantsTwo hundred and thirty baby food products targeted to IYC were selected. Breastmilk substitutes and products targeted at children over 3 years old were excluded.
main outcome measuresPer cent of missing nutrition data, per cent of products with added sugar or sweetener and exceeded sodium or salts, per cent of products marketed as suitable for IYC under 6 months.
resultsMost products were 'ready-to-eat', including fruit (n=42, 18.5%) and vegetable (n=29, 12.8%) purees, meat, fish or cheese purees (n =26, 11.5%); 'dry or instant cereal/starchy foods' (n=27, 11.9%), including predominantly dry cereals, 'juices and other drinks' (n=26, 11.5%). 95% (n=219/230) of products were missing total sugar information, 78% (n=180/230) were missing either sodium or salt, and 25% (n=57/230) were missing total fat. Among products with sugar and sodium information, 41% (n=94/230) included added sugar or sweeteners, and 48% (n=24/50) exceeded the NPM sodium threshold. 40% of products (n=92/230) were marketed as suitable for IYC aged under 6 months.
conclusionBaby foods marketed for IYC showed a high per cent of missing nutrition information and disparity with WHO's guidelines for complementary feeding, age of introduction, sugar and salt content. Stronger regulation is needed in this area to minimise higher risk of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in later life.
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.