ArticleInternational breastfeeding journal2024
Comparing factors associated with overall satisfaction for different forms of remote breastfeeding support in the UK.
Article in International breastfeeding journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of remote breastfeeding guidance on breastfeeding rates and neonatal health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRemote forms of breastfeeding support, such as helplines and social media, offer a flexible and convenient form of support to offer help at critical points, e.g., when the risk of breastfeeding cessation is high. Currently, there is little known about who accesses different forms of remote breastfeeding support and what factors impact overall satisfaction. As part of an evaluation of the UK National Breastfeeding Helpline (NBH) (which offers breastfeeding support via a helpline and online media), we aimed to (a) understand who accesses different forms of NBH support, and (b) identify key factors associated with overall satisfaction for helpline and online media support.
methodsAll service users who contacted the NBH between November 2021 and March 2022 were invited to participate in the evaluation via an online survey. Survey questions explored the type and timing of support, reasons for the contact, attitudes towards the help and support received, impact of the support on breastfeeding experiences and demographic factors. Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney tests explored variations in who accessed the helpline or online media. Multiple linear regression models were fitted to explore the factors related to the service users' 'overall satisfaction'. The quantitive data were combined with qualitative comments into descriptive themes.
resultsOverall, online media users were significantly more likely to be younger, White, multiparous, less educated and have English as a first language compared to those who contact the helpline. Similar factors that significantly influenced overall satisfaction for both support models were the service being easy to access, receiving helpful information that met expectations, resolving breastfeeding issues, and feeling reassured and more confident. Significant factors for the helpline were callers feeling understood and more knowledgeable about breastfeeding following the call, being able to put into practice the information provided, feeling encouraged to continue breastfeeding, feeling that the volunteer gave the support that was needed, and seeking out additional support.
conclusionsOnline and helpline forms of breastfeeding support suit different demographics and call purposes. While optimal breastfeeding support needs to be accessible, flexible and instrumental, helpline users need real-time relational support to deal with more complex challenges.
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.