Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36798794›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2023

Coping with the 2022 infant formula shortage.

Maria Kalaitzandonakes, Brenna Ellison, Jonathan Coppess

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Balancing access to donor human milk: Rationing vs expanding use.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  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

3 authors.

Maria KalaitzandonakesDepartment of Agricultural & Consumer Economics, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States.
Brenna EllisonDepartment of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States.
Jonathan CoppessDepartment of Agricultural & Consumer Economics, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To estimate the proportion of US consumers who sought formula during the shortage, what coping mechanisms they used, and public support for formula policies, we conducted an online survey of approximately 1,000 US consumers in August 2022 via Qualtrics. Approximately 35% of consumers attempted to purchase formula during the shortage, for their own household or on behalf of someone else, and the most common coping mechanisms were focused on searching different outlets (e.g., multiple stores, online). During the shortage public health agencies published recommendations for consumers - some were highly utilized (e.g., searching multiple stores), however, some were utilized less frequently (e.g., brand switching, breastfeeding). Additionally, despite warnings, some consumers still attempted to make their own formula. Understanding what coping mechanisms were and were not utilized, and their related risks has important implications for improving public health outreach in the future. Finally, we find considerable public support for regulation to ensure adequate supply of formula in the future, in particular regulation allowing imported formula and increased government involvement in the number of firms producing formula.

Indexed as

FormulaHealth communicationHealth policyInfant healthShortage

Identifiers

PMID36798794
PMCPMC9926015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.