Guimarães, Hellen Nataly Correia Lagos, Petreça, Renata Henrique, Almeida, Sheila Tamanini de, Magno, Flavio, Santos, Rosane Sampaio, Taveira, Karinna Veríssimo Meira, Araujo, Cristiano Miranda de, Celli, Adriane
Abstract
To systematically review the literature regarding the impact of prematurity on the transition of food consistencies in infants during the introduction of complementary feeding.
Searches were conducted in the EMBASE, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences (LILACS), LIVIVO, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, Google Scholar; for gray literature, searches were conducted on Open Gray, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses databases, from August 10, 2020, onwards.
"PECOS" was selected to determine inclusion criteria: Population (P): Infants; Exposure (E): Prematurity; Comparison (C): Full-term newborns; Outcomes (O): Progression of food consistencies in premature newborns with or without comparison; Study design (S): Cohort study, Case-control; Cross-sectional.
The methodological quality of the selected observational studies was assessed using the Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (MASTARI).
A total of 3,310 articles were found, of which nine were selected for qualitative synthesis. Among the selected studies, a relationship between invasive oral interventions and feeding difficulties was observed for all assessed skills, with feeding difficulties being more frequent in infants with lower gestational age.
Most studies found no significant relationship between prematurity and difficulties in the progression of food consistencies during the introduction of complementary feeding; only three studies demonstrated such a relationship.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 February 2025.
All research outputs
#19,147,185
of 27,761,899 outputs
Outputs from CoDAS
#141
of 450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,783
of 410,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CoDAS
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,761,899 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 450 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 410,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
