Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2025
Effectiveness of a Mobile Breastfeeding Monitoring Tool Among Mothers in WeChat Groups on Breastfeeding Exclusivity and Self-Efficacy: Intention-to-Treat and Per-Protocol Analyses of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of Digital Health Interventions on Breastfeeding Rates, Self-Efficacy, and Knowledge: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of an AI-driven platform for standard postnatal care and breastfeeding: results from the COMLACT study.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Using Group Chats to Drive Behavior Change in Digital Health Interventions: Scoping Review and Realist Synthesis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
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
backgroundGlobally, the pursuit of exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) remains a formidable challenge. The surge in popularity of mobile health interventions demonstrates its potential as a promising avenue for promoting breastfeeding practices. Nevertheless, research investigating breastfeeding monitoring interventions via mobile health remains scarce among diverse populations.
objectiveThis study aimed to use an app called Breastfeeding Aiding Tool to monitor breastfeeding and provide tailored feedback to improve EBF, maternal breastfeeding self-efficacy, and depression status.
methodsIn an unblinded randomized controlled trial, the intervention leveraged the app to monitor breastfeeding practices recorded by users and to provide automatic feedback, facilitating non-face-to-face education and consultation in a WeChat group by 3 health care workers. Mothers in the control group received the same education and consultation services via the WeChat group. Lactating mothers and their healthy primiparous infants aged 35 to 49 days were recruited from 2 clinics, and the online follow-up period was 2 months. Information about breastfeeding practices, maternal breastfeeding confidence, and maternal depression status were collected through SoJump.
resultsFrom September 2022 to January 2024, a total of 141 eligible mother-infant dyads were recruited offline and allocated to the two groups; 109 (n=55, 50.5% in the intervention group and n=54, 49.5% in the control group) dyads completed the 2-month online follow-up and were included in the analysis, among which 27 (49%) mothers actively engaged with the app. In the per-protocol analysis sample, the rate of EBF of the app-using group was 57% (16/28), compared to 48% (39/81) in the comparison group (P=.41; odds ratio [OR] 1.44, 95% CI 0.60-3.41; adjusted OR 1.66, 95% CI 0.59-4.68). The rate of full breastfeeding (comprising predominant breastfeeding and EBF) was significantly higher in the mothers using the app than in the nonusers (26/28, 93% vs 59/81, 73%; P=.03; OR 4.85, 95% CI 1.06-22.15; adjusted OR 5.55, 95% CI 1.07-28.83). Maternal breastfeeding self-efficacy in the app-using group improved by an average of 1.36 (95% CI -3.79 to 1.50), while it declined slightly, by 0.16 (95% CI -3.16 to 2.84), in the nonusing group; the difference between the 2 groups was not significant (P=.61). The depression scores in the app-using group decreased by an average of 2.29 (95% CI -5.19 to 0.62), whereas they increased by 1.07 (95% CI -0.58 to 2.73) in the nonusing group; there was a significant difference between the two groups (P=.046).
conclusionsOur findings underscore the significant potential of the Breastfeeding Aiding Tool app as an aid to breastfeeding guidance in sustaining breastfeeding practices, reducing formula use, and enhancing positive maternal breastfeeding emotions. To further validate the effectiveness of improving EBF and self-efficacy, studies should aim to address barriers to the app's acceptability and enroll a larger cohort of mothers.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200065220; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojEN.html?proj=182939.
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.