Dataset Information

Relationship between breast feeding and motor development in children: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The recommendations of most health organisations encourage mothers to keep exclusive breast feeding during the first 6 months and combining breast feeding with complementary feeding at least during the first and second years, due to the numerous immunologic, cognitive developmental and motor skill benefits that breast feeding confers. Although the influence of breast feeding on motor development during childhood has been studied, the findings are inconsistent, and some studies have even reported no effect. This manuscript presents a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis, with the aim of reviewing the relationship between breast feeding and motor skill development in children in terms of duration, exclusivity or non-exclusivity of breast feeding.

Methods and analysis

The search will be conducted using Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2019. Observational studies (cross-sectional and follow-up studies) written in English or Spanish that investigate the association between breast feeding and motor development in children will be included. This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. The Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies and The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for longitudinal studies will be used to assess the quality of included studies. The effect of breast feeding on motor skill development will be calculated as the primary outcome. Subgroup analyses will be carried out based on the characteristics of motor skill development and the population included.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval is not required because the data used will be obtained from published studies, and there will be no concerns about privacy. The findings from this study will be relevant information regarding the association of breast feeding with motor development in children and could be used encourage to improve breastfeeding rates. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018093706.

SUBMITTER: Hernandez Luengo M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6756461 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Relationship between breast feeding and motor development in children: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hernández Luengo Monserrat M Álvarez-Bueno Celia C Álvarez-Bueno Celia C Pozuelo-Carrascosa Diana P DP Berlanga-Macías Carlos C Martínez-Vizcaíno Vicente V Notario-Pacheco Blanca B

BMJ open 20190917 9

<h4>Introduction</h4>The recommendations of most health organisations encourage mothers to keep exclusive breast feeding during the first 6 months and combining breast feeding with complementary feeding at least during the first and second years, due to the numerous immunologic, cognitive developmental and motor skill benefits that breast feeding confers. Although the influence of breast feeding on motor development during childhood has been studied, the findings are inconsistent, and some studi ...[more]

PMID: 31530597

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCaesarean delivery under maternal request (CDMR) is a major factor contributing to the rising global rates of caesarean section (CS) procedure. The choice of CDMR without medical indications could provide a sense of assured safety by avoiding the experiences and complications of vaginal birth, and the risks related to an emergency CS. However, it might adversely influence women's breast feeding patterns and produce a long-lasting impact on maternal and neonatal health. This study aims to systematically review the current evidence relating to the effects of intentions of performing CDMR on breast feeding.Methods and analysisA comprehensive literature search will be performed in three English-language electronic databases, major clinical study registries and other sources for original studies reporting the breast feeding outcomes after a planned CDMR or vaginal delivery. The three databases Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched via Ovid from inception to February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), pseudo-RCTs, cohort studies and case-control studies on this topic will be included. Participants in the experimental or case group should meet the Robson criteria of classes 2B or 4B and have experienced planned CS undertaken for no maternal or foetal indication, whereas participants in the control group have undergone scheduled vaginal delivery. All kinds of breast feeding outcomes will be included. Meta-analyses will be attempted to provide an estimate of the pooled effect and will be stratified by different study designs. A qualitative description will be provided if quantitative synthesis proves to be fruitless.Ethics and disseminationThis study is a secondary literature review that does not need ethical approval. No primary data will be collected from the participants. Findings of this study will be presented at scientific conferences and be published in scientific journals.Prospero registration numberCRD42020160303.

Project description:BackgroundThe relationship between motor performance and back pain in children and adolescents remains unclear. This article describes the protocol for a systematic review to summarize the knowledge about the association between motor performance, such as agility, flexibility, balance, strength, muscle endurance, and cardiorespiratory fitness, and back pain. Thus, our aim is to identify the influence of motor performance on back pain among children and adolescents.MethodsTwo independent researchers will search MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL databases, with no period or language restrictions. We will include cross-sectional, cohort, case-control, and controlled clinical trial studies based on the following criteria: (a) participants from 6 to 19 years of age, (b) assessment of motor performance, (c) assessment of back pain, and (d) report measures of associations between motor performance and back pain. Study quality and risk of bias will be assessed using an adapted version of the Downs and Black instrument. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations will be used to assess the strength of the body of evidence. Meta-analyses of association measures will be performed for each type of motor performance, separately for different study types. The results will be reported using forest to show the pooled effect of findings and funnel plots to assess precision of the data. If studies are not homogeneous, results from the meta-analyses will not be reported. Associations will then be synthesized descriptively using a pragmatic approach.DiscussionThis systematic review will provide critical insights into the association between motor performance and back pain among children and adolescents; this information may help support clinical practice guidelines as well as public health programs.Ethics and disseminationProtocol was written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020178496.

Project description:ObjectivesCompare the safety of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) on neurodevelopment of infants/children exposed in utero or during breast feeding.Design and settingSystematic review and Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA). MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until 27 April 2017. Screening, data abstraction and quality appraisal were completed in duplicate by independent reviewers.Participants29 cohort studies including 5100 infants/children.InterventionsMonotherapy and polytherapy AEDs including first-generation (carbamazepine, clobazam, clonazepam, ethosuximide, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone, valproate) and newer-generation (gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, vigabatrin) AEDs. Epileptic women who did not receive AEDs during pregnancy or breast feeding served as the control group.Primary and secondary outcome measuresCognitive developmental delay and autism/dyspraxia were primary outcomes. Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, language delay, neonatal seizures, psychomotor developmental delay and social impairment were secondary outcomes.ResultsThe NMA on cognitive developmental delay (11 cohort studies, 933 children, 18 treatments) suggested that among all AEDs only valproate was statistically significantly associated with more children experiencing cognitive developmental delay compared with control (OR=7.40, 95% credible interval (CrI) 3.00 to 18.46). The NMA on autism (5 cohort studies, 2551 children, 12 treatments) suggested that oxcarbazepine (OR 13.51, CrI 1.28 to 221.40), valproate (OR 17.29, 95% CrI 2.40 to 217.60), lamotrigine (OR 8.88, CrI 1.28 to 112.00) and lamotrigine+valproate (OR 132.70, CrI 7.41 to 3851.00) were associated with significantly greater odds of developing autism compared with control. The NMA on psychomotor developmental delay (11 cohort studies, 1145 children, 18 treatments) found that valproate (OR 4.16, CrI 2.04 to 8.75) and carbamazepine+phenobarbital+valproate (OR 19.12, CrI 1.49 to 337.50) were associated with significantly greater odds of psychomotor delay compared with control.ConclusionsValproate alone or combined with another AED is associated with the greatest odds of adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes compared with control. Oxcarbazepine and lamotrigine were associated with increased occurrence of autism. Counselling is advised for women considering pregnancy to tailor the safest regimen.Trial registration numberPROSPERO database (CRD42014008925).

Project description:BackgroundAlzheimer disease (AD) entails a long-term progressive decline in the cognitive ability to think and remember, and it has become a major concern for patients receiving surgery and anesthesia. However, studies investigating the relationship between general anesthesia and AD have yielded inconsistent results. Therefore, we plan to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the relationship between general anesthesia and AD, and to verify whether general anesthesia is an independent risk factor for AD.MethodsA systematic and comprehensive search will be performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google scholar from their inception to August 2017. Peer-reviewed cohort and case-control studies including nested case-control studies reporting the relationship between general anesthesia and AD will be eligible for inclusion. The quality of included studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Heterogeneity of estimates across studies as well as publication bias will be assessed. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. All statistical analyses will be conducted using the Stata SE version 15.0.ResultsThe results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.ConclusionOur study will provide the evidence for the relationship between general anesthesia and dementia. The review will benefit patients and anesthesiologists, surgeons, and policymakers.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval and informed consent are not required, as the study will be a literature review and will not involve direct contact with patients or alterations to patient care.Trial registrationThe protocol for this review has been registered in the PROSPERO network (registration number: CRD42017073790).

Project description:BackgroundElimination disorders are highly prevalent in childhood and often associated with clinically relevant comorbid psychological disorders. The aim of this study is to determine if, and to what extent, children with elimination disorders show higher internalizing and externalizing problems than their healthy peers.MethodsA multistep literature search was performed from database inception until May 1st, 2022. PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42022303555) were used to identify studies reporting on internalizing and/or externalizing symptoms in children with an elimination disorder and a healthy control (HC) group. First, a systematic review was provided. Second, where data allowed for it, a quantitative meta-analysis with random effects model was conducted to analyze the differences between the elimination disorder and the HC groups for internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Effect size was standardized mean difference. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to examine the effect of sex, age, and study quality. Funnel plots were used to detect a publication bias. Where found, the trim and fill method was used to correct it.Results36 articles were included, 32 of them reporting on enuresis (n = 3244; mean age = 9.4; SD = 3.4; 43.84% female) and 7 of them on encopresis (n = 214; mean age = 8.6; SD = 2.3; 36.24% female). Children with an elimination disorder presented significantly lower self-concept (ES:0.42; 95%CI [0.08; 9.76]; p = 0.017) and higher symptom scores for thought problems (ES:-0.26; 95%CI: -0.43;-0.09]; p = 0.003), externalizing symptoms (ES: -0.20; 95%CI [-0.37;-0.03]; p = 0.020), attention problems (ES:-0.37; 95%CI [-0.51;-0.22]; p = 0.0001), aggressive behavior (ES:-0.33; 95%CI [-0.62;-0.04]; p = 0.025) and social problems (ES:-0.39; 95%CI [-0.58;-0.21]; p = 0.0001). Significant publication biases were found across several of the studied domains. No significant effect of sex, age or quality of the study score was found.ConclusionsChildren with an elimination disorder may have significant internalizing and externalizing problems, as well as impaired self-concept. It is recommendable to screen for them in children with enuresis or encopresis and provide appropriate interventions.

Project description:IntroductionThe global burden of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is steadily increasing. Experimental studies have demonstrated that a novel hormone secreted by bone cells, osteocalcin (OC), can stimulate beta-cell proliferation and improve insulin sensitivity in mice. Observational studies in humans have investigated the relationship between OC and metabolic parameters, and T2DM. Importantly, few studies have reported on the undercarboxylated form of OC (ucOC), which is the putative active form of OC suggested to affect glucose metabolism.ObjectivesWe will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to: (1) compare the levels of serum OC and ucOC between T2DM and normal glucose-tolerant controls (NGC); (2) investigate the risk ratios between serum OC and ucOC, and T2DM; (3) determine the correlation coefficient between OC and ucOC and fasting insulin levels, homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance, haemoglobin A1c and fasting glucose levels and (4) explore potential sources of between-study heterogeneity. The secondary objective is to compare the serum OC and ucOC between pre-diabetes (PD) and NGC and between T2DM and PD.Hods and analysisThis study will report items in line with the guidelines outlined in preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. We will include observational studies (cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies) and intervention studies with baseline data. Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS) will be searched from inception until July 2018 without language restrictions. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts and conduct a full-text assessment to identify eligible studies. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus with a third reviewer. The risk of bias assessment will be conducted by two reviewers independently based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Potential sources of between-study heterogeneity will be tested using meta-regression/subgroup analyses. Contour-enhanced funnel plots and Egger's test will be used to identify potential publication bias.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required. We will disseminate the results to a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentation.Prospero registration numberCRD42017073127.

Dataset Information

Relationship between breast feeding and motor development in children: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Relationship between breast feeding and motor development in children: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets