ReviewHealth science reports2026
Enjoying the Free Menu? Discoursing the Barriers to Exclusive Breastfeeding for Improved Maternal and Child Health in Tanzania: A Review of Evidence.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite the emphasised benefits of exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) among pregnant and breastfeeding mothers being recognised globally, its practice is still low among developing countries, including Tanzania. Several barriers to EBF in Tanzania have been detailed but lack a comprehensive approach. This study provides comprehensive evidence of the barriers to EBF, drawing from existing studies in Tanzania. Methods: This review was conducted using search queries in several databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science. The review included qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies written in English addressing EBF in Tanzania. The critical appraisal skills programme checklist was used to assess the quality of studies while thematic analysis was used to analyse the data for each identified study. Result: Twenty-three studies (23) from 10 regions met inclusion criteria, including eight qualitative studies, nine cross-sectional studies, four mixed methods approaches, and two quantitative studies. All the studies reported maternal, infant and social-environmental to EBF practices in Tanzania. Conclusion: Though this review has shown evidence of barriers to EBF, further research is needed, especially on factors influencing EBF practices in Tanzania.
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.