 |
| Research article summary (published 30 May 2002): |
|
Free Full Text! See links below |
How good is the evidence linking breastfeeding and intelligence?
Full Abstract
BACKGROUND:
We conducted a critical review of the many studies that have tried to determine whether breastfeeding has a beneficial effect on intellect.
DESIGN/METHODS:
By searching Medline and the references of selected articles, we identified publications that evaluated the association between breastfeeding and cognitive outcomes. We then appraised and described each study according to 8 principles of clinical epidemiology:
1) study design, 2) target population:
whether full-term infants were studied, 3) sample size, 4) collection of feeding data:
whether studies met 4 standards of quality- suitable definition and duration of breastfeeding, and appropriate timing and source of feeding data, 5) control of susceptibility bias:
whether studies controlled for socioeconomic status and stimulation of the child, 6) blinding:
whether observers of the outcome were blind to feeding status, 7) outcome:
whether a standardized individual test of general intelligence at an age older than 2 years was used, and 8) format of results:
whether studies reported an effect size or some other strategy to interpret the clinical impact of results.
RESULTS:
We identified 40 pertinent publications from 1929 to February 2001. Twenty-seven (68%) concluded that breastfeeding promotes intelligence. Many studies, however, had methodological flaws. Only 2 papers studied full-term infants and met all 4 standards of high-quality feeding data, controlled for 2 critical confounders, reported blinding, used an appropriate test, and allowed the reader to interpret the clinical significance of the findings with an effect size. Of these 2, 1 study concluded that the effect of breastfeeding on intellect was significant, and the other did not.
CONCLUSION:
Although the majority of studies concluded that breastfeeding promotes intelligence, the evidence from higher quality studies is less persuasive.
Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills
Author information
Author/s: Jain, Anjali (A); Concato, John (J); Leventhal, John M (JM);
Affiliation: Section of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, University of Chicago Children's Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, USA. ajain@peds.bsd.uchicago.edu
Journal and publication information
Publication Type: Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.; Review
Journal: Pediatrics (Pediatrics), published in United States. (Language: eng)
Reference: 2002-Jun; vol 109 (issue 6) : pp 1044-53
Dates: Created 2002/06/03; Completed 2002/07/15; Revised 2006/11/15;
PMID: 12042541, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 11/6/2008)
Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.
External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):
Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.
This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.
MeSH headings (categories)
This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.
|
|
Related articles
This article has not been indexed for related articles as yet, however you can still use the live related article search links below.
See a large map of 100+ related articles.