Question · asked by 1 review
Baby-led weaning (BLW) vs Traditional complementary feeding (TCF): Infant weight-length gain (achievement of adequate weight)
- Population
- Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries
- Intervention
- Baby-led weaning (BLW)
- Comparison
- Traditional complementary feeding (TCF)
- Outcome
- Infant weight-length gain (achievement of adequate weight)
Baby-led weaning/BLISS did not significantly influence infant weight-length (adequate weight) gain versus other complementary feeding models (pooled OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 10.51; ungraded).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
BLW vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional CF) Infant weight-length gain (achievement of adequate weight) · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western… · Measured at 18-78 months of age, Outpatient care in Western industrialized (European/Anglo-Saxon) countries, observational studies Baby-led weaning/BLISS did not significantly influence infant weight-length (adequate weight) gain versus other complementary feeding models (pooled OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 10.51; ungraded). Complementary Feeding Caregivers' Practices and Growth, Risk of Overweight/Obesity, and Other… (2022) All outcomes | OR 1.36 [0.18, 10.51] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
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.