ArticleBMJ public health2025
Association of feeding practices with growth in infants: a longitudinal observational study in a rural district of Pakistan.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) is recommended for the first 6 months of an infant's life, but barriers to EBF persist due to sociocultural, economic and health-related factors in resource-poor settings. This study examines the association between feeding practices and malnutrition in a birth cohort from a rural district of Pakistan. Methods: Data were collected from a cohort of n=2697 infants, up to 6 months of age, through routine household visits by community health workers. The study analysed demographic characteristics, feeding practices, anthropometric and health information of infants and their mothers. Results: Breastfeeding practices varied, with EBF being more common in the first month, while predominant breastfeeding (breastmilk with non-milk liquids) was most prevalent from 1 to 6 months. Almost all (98.3%) infants had been breastfed at some point between birth and 6 months but <10% were being exclusively breastfed by 6 months of age, with a significant proportion already identified as wasting (14.7%), stunted (36.7%) and underweight (38.5%) at baseline (birth). Early initiation of complementary feeding or breastmilk alternatives before 4 months was significantly associated with increased odds of wasting by 6 months of age (adjusted OR (AOR)=4.14; 95% CI: 1.95 to 8.77; p<0.001). Infants not born in medical facilities had higher risks of wasting (AOR=2.43; 95% CI: 1.13 to 5.21) and underweight status (AOR=1.74; 95% CI: 1.13 to 2.71). Conclusion: Our study indicates that infants were over four times more likely to be malnourished by 6 months if complementary feeding was initiated before 4 months of age. While causal relations/directionality cannot be established from these findings, we believe that parents may resort to suboptimal complementary feeding practices shortly after birth, due to perceived inadequate infant growth. A tailored approach addressing systemic barriers to optimal feeding practices is recommended for resource-constrained, nutrition-poor settings, such as rural Pakistan.
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.