Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

37 questions · 37 findings · 7 reviews

No studies found 18 · 48.6%GRADE not reported 2 · 5.4%Very low 10 · 27%Low 3 · 8.1%Moderate 4 · 10.8%High 0 · 0%

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional/non-responsive CF)

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Responsive complementary feeding probably reduces the risk of overweight/obesity versus other feeding models (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.71; moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional/non-responsive CF)

Physical growth / weight gain · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Two RCTs suggest responsive complementary feeding leads to better weight gain in the first two years, though effects were small and not always sustained (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Non-responsive complementary feeding showed no significant association with overweight/obesity across observational studies (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Weight gain · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

Narratively, restrictive NRCF style tended to favor excess weight and coercive/pressuring style tended to favor lower weight (3 of 5 studies each; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) / other caregivers' feeding practices vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional/non-responsive CF)

Type 2 diabetes (later in life) · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

No eligible studies examined the influence of complementary feeding practices on later type 2 diabetes; this is an evidence gap.

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) / other caregivers' feeding practices vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional/non-responsive CF)

Hypertension (later in life) · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

No eligible studies examined the influence of complementary feeding practices on later hypertension; this is an evidence gap.

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) / other caregivers' feeding practices vs Other models of complementary feeding (traditional/non-responsive CF)

Dental caries · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

No eligible studies examined the influence of complementary feeding practices on later dental caries; this is an evidence gap.

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive complementary feeding (RCF) vs usual care

Z score BMI · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

In one RCT, responsive complementary feeding lowered BMIz at 13 months versus control (0.23 vs 0.42, p=0.01; low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non-responsive complementary feeding (NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Overweight/obesity risk · Healthy children aged 6–24 months in Western industrialized countries

NRCF showed no significant association with overweight/obesity across the reported comparisons (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Responsive / non-responsive complementary feeding (RCF/NRCF) vs Other models of complementary feeding

Choking · Healthy, term-born, normal-birth-weight infants aged 4-24 months (breastfed and/or formula-fed) in Western industrialized countries

No systematic reviews or studies assessed choking risk for RCF or NRCF (only BLW/BLISS); this is an evidence gap.

1 finding from 1 review

Consumers and providers working in partnership vs usual practice

Degree to which health service alterations reflect health service user (trial participant) priorities (demand responsiveness) · consumer and provider partnership participants or trial participants

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Multi‐component intervention with consumers and providers working in partnership vs the same intervention without partnership

Degree to which health service alterations reflect health service user (trial participant) priorities (demand responsiveness) · consumer and provider partnership participants or trial participants

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Parent‐mediated communication intervention vs no intervention

Parents' communication and interaction strategies: directiveness and responsiveness · children up to 5 years of age with a communication difficulty associated with any non‐progressive motor disorder acquired before 2 years…
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Postoperative sedation 12 hours after surgery (units of RSS, Ramsay Sedation Scale from 1 = Anxious or agitated or restless to 6 = Unresponsive) (MD, 95% CI) · adults having abdominal surgery
1 finding from 1 review

Intrauterine balloon tamponade plus normal care (misoprostol) vs normal care (misoprostol)

Mortality due to bleeding · women diagnosed with primary PPH following vaginal birth. Women were suspected to have PPH due to clinical atony and who were quote:…

It is very uncertain whether intrauterine balloon tamponade plus normal care (misoprostol) changes mortality due to bleeding compared with normal care (misoprostol) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review