ArticleScientific reports2026
WHO exclusive breastfeeding recommendation and cognitive development in Germany.
Article in Scientific 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated whether adherence to the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation of six months exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) is associated with better cognitive development throughout early childhood in Germany. Furthermore, it was assessed whether this association differs between low-risk infants and “small vulnerable newborns” (SVN; infants born preterm and/or with low birth weight), and whether an optimal EBF duration for cognitive outcomes exists. Data were drawn from the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS), including up to 2511 children assessed repeatedly from infancy to 7 years. Standardized cognitive outcomes included abstract thinking (3 years), and phonological working memory (3, 6, and 7 years). EBF duration was categorized into no EBF, short EBF (i.e., EBF for less than 6 months), and 6-month EBF. No cognitive benefits were found at any age for 6-month EBF compared to shorter EBF durations or no EBF. For SVN, no consistent benefits of longer EBF were observed. Maternal education predicted cognitive outcomes consistently (range η2 = 0.01–0.04). Generalized additive models indicated no optimal EBF duration across domains. In conclusion, WHO 6-month EBF was not linked to better cognitive performance in both low-risk infants and SVN in this collective.
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.