Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40125991›Full record

ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2025

Cross-Sectional Associations Between Exposure to Commercial Milk Formula Marketing, Beliefs About Its Use, and Socioeconomic Position Among Pregnant Women and Mothers in the UK.

Martha Athanasiadou, Florence Sheen, Andrea D Smith, Clare Llewellyn, Rana Conway

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A Systematic Review to Reassess the Formula for Early Life Growth.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026
    Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Martha AthanasiadouResearch, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
Florence SheenSchool of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6256-4395
Andrea D SmithMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Clare LlewellynResearch, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0066-2827
Rana ConwayResearch, Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0955-7107

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

International provisions are in place to restrict marketing practices that idealise the use of commercial milk formula (CMF) and discourage breastfeeding. In high-income countries, women of lower socioeconomic position (SEP) are less likely to breastfeed. This study aimed to characterise the nature of exposure to CMF marketing in the UK, the extent to which women hold positive beliefs about CMF and examine the relationship between exposure to CMF marketing, holding positive beliefs about CMF and SEP. Data on these topics were collected for 1052 pregnant women and mothers of children under 18 months of age between February 2020 and February 2021. Participants were assigned a 'CMF marketing score' according to the number of locations where they recalled seeing advertisements, engaging with companies or receiving promotional activity. The extent to which women held positive beliefs about CMF ('CMF positivity score') was determined by level of agreement with 17 statements. Principal component analysis, analyses of covariance and regression analyses were applied. Every woman reported exposure to CMF marketing from multiple channels. CMF marketing score did not vary across SEP groups (p = 0.342). Women of lower and middle SEP held stronger CMF positive beliefs than women of higher SEP, including 'Breastfeeding and formula feeding provide a baby with the same health benefits' (p < 0.005). CMF marketing score was not associated with CMF positivity score. Marketing suggesting CMF provides benefits similar to, or greater than, breastfeeding should be restricted to help mitigate current inequalities in infant feeding practices.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInfant FormulaMarketingMothersPregnant PeopleSocial ClassAdultBreast FeedingCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInfantPregnancySocioeconomic FactorsUnited KingdomYoung Adultbreastfeedingbreastmilk substitutecommercial milk formulainfant feedinginfant formulamarketingsocioeconomic position

Identifiers

PMID40125991
PMCPMC12150155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.