Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37999918›Full record

ArticleCurrent nutrition reports2023

Barriers and Facilitators for the Donation and Acceptance of Human Breast milk: A Scoping Review.

Edlin Glane Mathias, Divya Sussana Patil, Ashwija Kolakemar, Jisha B Krishnan, Vishnu Renjith, Nachiket Gudi, Ravi Shankar Swamy, Angela Brand

Open access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Current nutrition reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Exploring human milk donation: A cross-sectional study.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Edlin Glane MathiasDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Divya Sussana PatilDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Ashwija KolakemarDepartment of Nephrology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Jisha B KrishnanDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Vishnu RenjithSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Nachiket GudiDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India. gudi.nachiket@manipal.edu.
Ravi Shankar SwamyImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Angela BrandDepartment of Health Information, Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Manipal Academy of Higher Education · INKasturba Medical College, Manipal · INMaastricht University · NLManipal Hospital · INRoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewHuman milk is the best source of nutrients for all infants. When a mother's own milk is unavailable, the World Health Organization suggests using donor human milk for premature neonates with or without medical complications. Exploring the barriers and facilitators for breast milk donation and its acceptability is essential for developing this intervention. A scoping review was conducted based on a methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley (Int J Soc Res Methodol 8:19-32, 2005). A search was conducted in PubMed (NCBI), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Web of Science (Elsevier). A two-stage sequential screening process was adopted. Data extraction was done using a piloted data extraction form. RECENT

findingsWe included 20 articles for narrative synthesis. Barriers and facilitators for donating and accepting breast milk were categorized under six themes: individual, family, community, workplace, health system, and policy-related. The common individual barriers were time requirements for BMD, personal dislike of the process, lack of knowledge, insufficient milk, negative opinions, and lack of information. Family stigma, negative rumors, less educated family members, and illness of a family member were identified as family-related barriers. Community-related barriers include cultural or religious unacceptable practices, societal taboos, and distance to milk banks. The major barriers identified in relation to the health system were lack of practical and psychological support, lack of information, storing and transportation issues, lack of knowledge among HCWs, and logistical challenges of creating a milk lab. The common work-related barriers were the lack of adequate time, philosophical objections, and incomprehension at returning to work. Policy-related barriers identified include the need for hygiene requirements, donation costs, and lack of standardized guidelines. Making the donation process faster, providing pick-up services for donors, and community education and male partner engagement regarding breast milk donation could help to boost the acceptability of breast milk donation.

Indexed as

Milk BanksMilk, HumanAttitudeBreast FeedingFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMothersAcceptanceBreastfeedingBreast milkDonationInfantMilk bankNewborn

Identifiers

PMID37999918
PMCPMC10766659
OpenAlexW4388975880

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.