Question · asked by 1 review
Squeezable (modified) feeding bottle vs Rigid feeding bottle: Energy and protein intake
- Population
- Infants up to 6 months (from term) born with cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and palate (Pierre Robin sequence or other syndromes excluded)
- Intervention
- Squeezable (modified) feeding bottle
- Comparison
- Rigid feeding bottle
- Outcome
- Energy and protein intake
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Squeezable (modified) feeding bottle vs Rigid feeding bottle Energy and protein intake · Infants up to 6 months (from term) born with cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and palate (Pierre Robin sequence or… · 3 to 6 months Feeding interventions for growth and development in infants with cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and… (2011) · Cochrane All outcomes | Mean energy and protein intakes (Brine 1994): statistically significant difference for protein intake at 3 and 6 months in favour of the squeezable bottle (P < 0.05); possibly confounded by four infants receiving a… | 1 study · 37 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feeding interventions for growth and development in infants with cleft lip, cleft palate or cleft lip and palate 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2010-10 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.