SynthesisMaternal & child nutrition2024
Women's views and experiences of breastfeeding during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A systematic review of qualitative evidence.
Synthesis 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 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Women's views and experiences of breastfeeding during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A systematic review of qualitative evidence.Maternal & child nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of educational workshops on breastfeeding practices in traditional Chinese postpartum centres: a cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic.International breastfeeding journal · 2026Article
- Factors associated with multiple births in the United Kingdom during COVID-19: A cross-sectional survey.PloS one · 2026Article
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
The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic affected breastfeeding women in various ways. Understanding their experiences during the pandemic is crucial for informing actionable recommendations, evidence-based strategies and future policies to support breastfeeding during global pandemics. This review aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence on women's breastfeeding perceptions, experiences and support needs during the pandemic. The Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI) guidelines on systematic reviews of qualitative evidence were followed. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection databases were searched. Methodological quality of included papers was assessed using JBI's checklist for qualitative research. The synthesised findings were generated using JBI's meta-aggregation approach. The JBI ConQual process was used to rank each synthesised finding. Fifty-two papers were included. The synthesised findings included: (1) women's awareness and commitment to breastfeeding during the pandemic, (2) the multifaceted breastfeeding experiences of women during the pandemic, (3) breastfeeding practices and challenges for working women, (4) professional support during the pandemic: navigating breastfeeding in an evolving health care context and (5) family and peer support groups during the challenging times of the pandemic. Breastfeeding women require clear information, accessible in-person lactation support, family emotional support, food security and protection of psychological well-being. The review reported diverse breastfeeding experiences, from social support challenges to positive aspects like remote work. Breastfeeding support and lactation consultants should be considered as essential services in future pandemics. Food security is crucial for breastfeeding households. Lactation services could prioritise face-to-face consultations for physical challenges and providing online informational support. Future research could explore innovative breastfeeding education strategies.
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.