ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2024
Inequalities in large-scale breastfeeding programmes in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso and Vietnam.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 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.
- Reaching Priority Populations When Scaling Up: A Qualitative Study of Practitioners' Experiences of Implementing Early Childhood Health Interventions in Victoria, Australia.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Article
- Inequalities in large-scale breastfeeding programmes in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso and Vietnam.Maternal & child nutrition · 2024Article
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
Abstract
Inequalities in breastfeeding programmes and practices have slowed global progress in providing the life-saving protection of breastfeeding for millions of infants despite well-known life-long impacts. As breastfeeding interventions are scaled up, inequalities in coverage and breastfeeding practices should be tracked, particularly in disadvantaged groups, who are likely to suffer the most serious health and developmental impacts of poor childhood nutrition. The literature provides evidence of inequalities in breastfeeding practices, but research is limited on socioeconomic disparities in the coverage of breastfeeding interventions. This paper (1) compares inequalities in breastfeeding practices in intervention and nonintervention areas and (2) documents inequalities in programme coverage by type of intervention. We disaggregated endline evaluation surveys in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso and Vietnam, where rigorous evaluations had documented significant overall improvements, and analysed whether inequalities in breastfeeding practices and programme coverage differed by treatment areas. We used Erreygers index to quantify inequalities and found that breastfeeding practices were largely pro-poor; intervention coverage was not consistently pro-poor. While counselling coverage often favoured women from the poorest quintile, public education/media coverage consistently favoured better-off women. Inequalities favoured more educated mothers in the coverage of combined interventions. None of the programmes had explicit equality objectives. The results indicate the need for introducing specific actions to reduce inequalities in breastfeeding policies and programmes. This is a priority unfinished agenda for nutrition programming.
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.