ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2026
Comparison of Lactation Information from Electronic Health Records with Survey Data Across Five US Health Systems.
Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundData on lactation status for research are often collected through surveys. Information on human milk feeding collected at routine healthcare visits and stored in electronic health records (EHR) is an emerging source of data for lactation research. We compared information on milk feeding obtained from structured EHR fields with survey data.
methodsWe included participants from five US healthcare systems in the Managing Our Mood survey. Individuals had a live birth (March 2022-October 2023), depression diagnosis during pregnancy, and ≥1 record of human milk feeding information in their or their infant's EHR. We compared information from EHR data up to ten months after delivery with survey data collected 3-4 months after delivery as the reference. We assessed agreement on lactation status (human milk feeding ever and at survey) using percent agreement, Cohen's kappa, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value overall and by characteristics.
resultsAccording to survey data, the prevalence of human milk feeding ever was 93.2% and was 73.0% at the time of survey among 281 eligible individuals. Agreement between data sources for ever and for human milk feeding at the survey was ≥92% with kappas ≥0.77. EHR and survey data agreed on human milk feeding ever for 97.3% (95% confidence interval: 94.6%, 98.7%) and on human milk feeding at the time of the survey for 98.0% (95% confidence interval: 95.1%, 99.2%) of those who reported yes to these practices on the survey. These measurements were lower among individuals with fewer records.
conclusionsThere was substantial agreement on lactation status between EHR and survey data. These findings suggest that lactation information from structured EHR may be used for epidemiologic research.
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.