ArticleBMJ open2020
Maternal and newborn outcomes of antenatal breastmilk expression: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
- Improving the transparency of animal experiments: valuable lessons learned from a systematic analysis of registration protocols.BMC veterinary research · 2026Article
- Mothers' Attitudes Towards Breastfeeding in Terms of Health Safety and Professional Lactation Education: A National Survey of Women.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Evaluating antenatal breastmilk expression outcomes: a scoping review.International breastfeeding journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection:2020
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMothers with diabetes face unique challenges associated with breastfeeding initiation and maintenance. Antenatal breastmilk expression (BME) may be suggested to mothers, including mothers with diabetes, to improve breastfeeding, maternal, and infant outcomes postpartum. However, there have been few evaluations of the potential harms and benefits of this practice. The objective of our scoping review will be to broadly examine the literature describing maternal and infant outcomes of antenatal BME. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will address the research question: 'Among women who engaged in antenatal BME, what maternal and infant outcomes have been evaluated?' A search of published and unpublished studies available in English will be conducted in February 2020 using the following databases: Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OVID). A search of the British Library E-Theses Online Services (EThOS) database and OpenGrey will be conducted to identify relevant grey literature. This scoping review will use a five-step framework to guide the selection, extraction, and analysis of eligible studies. Clinical consultation will be included as a sixth step to our methodology. Literature reporting on the effect of antenatal BME on maternal and infant outcomes, breastfeeding initiation and duration, and the experiences of women who have engaged in the practice will be considered. The data will be summarised with attention paid to high-risk obstetrical populations such as women with diabetes. Our results will be reported as outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics board approval will not be required due to the nature of the study's methodology. The results of this review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentation at relevant conferences. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework (osf.io/gfp2q).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.