ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2025
A Descriptive Investigation of Infant Feeding Bottles Marketed in the UK Designed to Replicate Breastfeeding and the Evidence That Underpins Them.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Associated factors of nipple fissures in early postpartum women: A retrospective case-control study.Medicine · 2026Article
- A ducted, biomimetic nipple replicates breastfeeding mechanics through ontogeny in an infant animal model.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Microplastics and child health: A scoping review of prenatal and early-life exposure routes and potential health risks.Toxicology reports · 2025Review
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
Scant attention has been given to the marketing of infant feeding bottles and teats with claimed equivalence to breastfeeding. Such bottles are purported as having 'breast-like' qualities and to be interchangeable with breastfeeding, encouraging breastfeeding mothers to combine breast and bottle feeding. However, the introduction of bottle feeding alongside breastfeeding can have a negative impact on breastfeeding duration and lead to cessation. We investigated features of infant feeding bottles marketed in the United Kingdom to replicate breastfeeding and appraised the underpinning evidence. We searched online to identify the most popular bottles marketed for breastfeeding in the United Kingdom and captured marketing materials from the bottle brand websites, importing them into NVivo11 for data analysis. We coded data in relation to features of bottles associated with breastfeeding and used Johanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools to appraise the evidence used to underpin the bottle features. We identified 10 bottle brands and 8 main advertised features of bottles aligned to breastfeeding. Features included bottles that simulated the breast, imitated breastfeeding physiology and aided combined breast and bottle feeding. Scientific evidence to support the bottle features was scarce, misleading, and inadequate, with only one study deemed to be high quality. Our findings show that infant feeding bottles are being marketed as equivalent to breastfeeding; however, the scientific evidence used to support features of these bottles is almost non-existent. Research on the impact of the marketing of bottles on breastfeeding and more effective controls of bottle company advertising are needed.
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.