ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2025
Assessing Compliance: Violations of WHO Code in Breast Milk Substitute Marketing, Ecuador.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast milk substitute (BMS) marketing significantly influences global infant feeding practices. Ecuador, like many countries, seeks to regulate these promotions under the WHO's International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes. This cross-sectional analysis assessed BMS marketing compliance with WHO's Code in Ecuador. Surveys were conducted with mothers (n = 330) and healthcare professionals (n = 66), complemented by observations at health facilities (n = 33) and retail outlets (n = 44). Media monitoring and product labelling evaluations were also conducted. The study revealed widespread exposure to BMS marketing outside health facilities (91.21% of mothers). Promotional activities targeted healthcare professionals, with significant interactions involving free supplies (26.09%) and gifts (21.74%). Retail outlets prominently displayed BMS promotions, often featuring discounts (95%). Compliance with labelling criteria was notably low, particularly concerning nutrition and health claims (39%). TV emerged as the dominant platform for BMS advertising, with 2884 ads aired over 16 h and 24 min, totalling $1,876,915.50 in expenditures. Digital platforms also featured BMS ads, with significant engagement on social media (533,845 interactions). This study reveals widespread violations of the WHO Code in Ecuador, emphasizing the need for stronger regulations and targeted education for healthcare professionals and the public to protect infant health and promote breastfeeding. Despite existing regulations, the pervasive advertising and substantial investment in BMS marketing across various media underscore significant enforcement gaps. To effectively safeguard maternal and child health, Ecuador must fully incorporate and rigorously enforce all Code recommendations within its national legislation.
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.