ReviewNutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia2026
A scoping review of squeeze pouch use among infants and children: Frequency, types, sociodemographic characteristics and parental experiences.
Review in Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of squeeze pouch use among infants and children: Frequency, types, sociodemographic characteristics and parental experiences.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2026Review
- A qualitative exploration of Australian parental perspectives of commercial squeeze pouches for infants and children.Health promotion international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsDemand for infant and child foods in squeeze pouches is increasing, yet limited evidence exists to inform public health strategies on who uses them and why. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the frequency and types of squeeze pouches consumed by children, the sociodemographic characteristics of users and insights from parental experiences regarding their use.
methodsA scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews. Between January and April 2024, three databases were searched (MEDLINE, Scopus and CINAHL) in addition to grey literature. Two independent reviewers screened 125 articles, of which 16 underwent full-text review. Results were summarised narratively.
resultsEleven studies across five countries were included. Eight studies reported on the prevalence of squeeze pouch consumption, ranging from 23.5% to 82.8% for infants and children. Frequency of intake ranged from daily (n = 4; 8.7%-29.2%), weekly (n = 7; 20.9%-75.2%), to monthly consumption (n = 7 16.7%-70.4%), depending on the study. Predominantly fruit- and dairy-based pouches were consumed. Frequent use was linked to higher deprivation, childcare use, larger families, early breastfeeding cessation and early solid food introduction. Studies on parental perceptions (n = 6) reported their perceived convenience, healthiness and low cost and concerns related to waste.
conclusionsThis review identified widespread use of squeeze pouches among infants and children, particularly fruit and dairy-based pouches. More research is needed on their nutritional impact to guide public health strategies promoting healthy early feeding practices.
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.