ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Understanding parental choices related to infant sleep practices in the United States using a mixed methods approach.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. 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.
- Caregiver lived experiences attempting to follow safe sleep recommendations to sleep their baby in a cot: a qualitative directed content analysis.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- Beyond the rules: an integrative review of parental perspectives on safer infant sleep in shared environments.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to gather information about parental practices, knowledge, and attitudes regarding infant sleep habits and environments, among families who practice non-recommended sleep practices.
methodsWe conducted one-on-one phone interviews with parents who had practiced non-recommended sleep methods with their infant and had or had not experienced an undesirable sleep event such as a fall. Interviews were recorded and coded with MAXQDA software. Intercoder reliability was assessed for consistency.
resultsThirty-one parents consented, and 21 interviews were conducted. Parents were aware of current American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) sleep recommendations for infants, knew about the sleep risks of non-recommended practices and had access to a recommended sleep environment. Parents reported developing modifications to the sleep environment which they perceived made their infant's sleep safer. Many parents felt that they could not be honest with their primary care provider about utilizing a non-recommended sleep environment; many had not had a detailed conversation with their primary care provider about safe sleep.
conclusionsOur data are consistent with previous studies which demonstrate that lack of access to a recommended sleep space or lack of knowledge about AAP sleep guidelines are not the primary reasons for practicing non-recommended sleep habits. Our data highlights the disconnect between the current AAP safe sleep recommendations and what parents feel is feasible to do on a daily basis. Evaluating the impact of a risk elimination strategy which is used in the US compared with a risk mitigation strategy which is used in other countries on parental practice and ability to communicate honestly with primary care providers is a future area of research.
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.