ArticleEuropean journal of public health2024
Factors impacting complementary feeding advice given by paediatricians in Cyprus.
Article in European journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between the timing of chewable complementary food introduction and functional speech disorders in children: a case-control study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Clinical variability in complementary feeding counseling in Türkiye: results from a pediatrician survey.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComplementary feeding has long-term effects on health but there is heterogeneity in recommendations across Europe. Recommendations include responsive feeding practices and nutritional needs but there is a debate in primary paediatricians as to which one should be the main criterion for complementary feeding. This pilot study investigated (i) the factors affecting the recommendations of paediatricians in Cyprus for starting complementary feeding, (ii) whether their main criterion is the developmental readiness or the nutritional needs of the infant and (iii) how this priority influences recommendations.
methodsThe 11-item questionnaire was completed by 73 Cypriot paediatricians.
resultsApproximately 66% of paediatricians recommended starting complementary feeding between 5 and 6 months, 29% between 4 and 5 and 3% between 6 and 7 months. Predefined schemes were recommended by ∼25% of paediatricians, baby-led weaning by 14% and 58% of paediatricians recommended either modality depending on the family circumstances whilst 4% involve the mother in the decision process. Approximately 64% of paediatricians recommended the introduction of parent's diet after the first year of life. Approximately 55% of paediatricians chose developmental readiness and 45% nutritional needs of the infant as their primary criterion for starting complementary feeding. Paediatricians who prioritized developmental readiness were more likely to be younger, less likely to advice on meat quantity and less likely to follow good nutritional practice.
conclusionsThe younger the paediatrician the more likely they are to prioritize developmental readiness over nutritional needs of the infant for complementary feeding. Paediatricians who prioritized developmental readiness were also less likely to provide nutritional advice.
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.