Question · asked by 1 review
Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding: Hypertension
- Population
- Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries
- Intervention
- Responsive complementary feeding (RCF)
- Comparison
- Other models of complementary feeding
- Outcome
- Hypertension
No eligible studies on caregivers' feeding practices during complementary feeding and later hypertension were found.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding Hypertension · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries · Outpatient No eligible studies on caregivers' feeding practices during complementary feeding and later hypertension were found. Complementary Feeding Caregivers' Practices and Growth, Risk of Overweight/Obesity, and Other… (2022) All outcomes | no estimate extracted | 0 studies | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complementary Feeding Caregivers' Practices and Growth, Risk of Overweight/Obesity, and Other Non-Communicable Diseases: A Systematic… 2022 All outcomes | Updated to September 2021 | 24 | Low / Critically Low |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.