ArticleBMC oral health2025
Ankyloglossia and breastfeeding self-efficacy in newborns: a birth cohort study.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- Oral inclusion cysts: a prospective cohort study on distribution, associated factors and prognosis in the first year of life.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Article
- Ankyloglossia in Newborns: Clinical Implications and Management-A Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of ankyloglossia (tongue-tie) on breastfeeding outcomes may be overestimated and surgical treatment in newborns remains a controversial topic. The aim of the present study was to assess and quantify the impact of ankyloglossia in newborns on breastfeeding self-efficacy at 14 days of life.
methodsA birth cohort study was conducted involving mothers and newborns soon after childbirth at a public hospital in the city of Canoas, southern Brazil. At the hospital, the lingual frenum of newborns were clinically examined and classified using the Bristol Tongue Assessment Tool. For every newborn with defined or suspected ankyloglossia, two newborns without ankyloglossia were co-enrolled for the study. At 14 days of the children's lives, the mothers were interviewed at home to collect data on breastfeeding self-efficacy using the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (BSES-SF). Poisson regression with robust variance was conducted to quantify differences in the Breastfeeding Self-Efficacy scores between exposed and nonexposed newborns after adjusting for maternal sociodemographic variables (mother's completed years of schooling, mother's age, family structure, progenitor status of child, mother's smoking status), the gestational variables (number of prenatal appointments, gestational age, comorbidities, type of childbirth), and child related variables (sex, birth weight, birth length) as confounders.
resultsThe final sample was composed of 31 children with ankyloglossia (exposed) and 57 without ankyloglossia (nonexposed). No significant differences were found in the BSEF-SF scores between the 31 children with ankyloglossia (mean BSEF-SF scores: 56.0; median BSEF-SF scores: 60; 95% CI: 51.9-60.1) and the 57 children without ankyloglossia (mean BSEF-SF scores: 59.6; median BSEF-SF scores: 60; 95% CI: 57.5-61.7). The Poisson regression analysis showed no significant difference in the BSEF-SF scores between newborns with ankyloglossia and those without ankyloglossia (Ratio = 0.95; 95% CI: 0.88-1.02; p = 0.139).
conclusionAnkyloglossia at birth exerted no clinically relevant impact on breastfeeding self-efficacy in children at 14 days of life.
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.