ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2026
Knowledge and perceptions of donor human milk among university health sciences students in southern Ecuador: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Donor human milk (DHM) is the safest nutritional alternative when breastfeeding is not possible, particularly for preterm newborns. Health sciences undergraduate students will play a key role in DHM counseling, promotion, and appropriate clinical use; however, evidence on their knowledge and perceptions in Latin America remains limited. Objective: To assess and compare the knowledge and perceptions regarding donor human milk (DHM) among undergraduate students of Medicine, Nursing, and Nutrition and Dietetics in southern Ecuador, and to examine the association between both variables according to academic program. Methods: An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted between October 2022 and April 2023 at a university in southern Ecuador. A total of 387 valid questionnaires were analyzed using convenience sampling. Data were collected using three structured instruments: a sociodemographic/academic questionnaire, an Results: Overall, 59% of participants showed low DHM knowledge and 41% high knowledge, with significant differences across academic programs ( Conclusion: Although perceptions toward DHM were favorable, knowledge gaps persist. The association between knowledge and perception was weak and not uniform across programs, highlighting the need to strengthen and standardize undergraduate training to support evidence-based counseling and improve DHM implementation.
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.