Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shepherd, C. K.
Right arrow Articles by Carter, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shepherd, C. K.
Right arrow Articles by Carter, H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1998 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom

research-article

Characteristics of responders and non-responders in an infant feeding study


C. K. Shepherd
, Health Visitor
K. G. Power
, Consultant Clinical Psychologist
Harden Carter
, Consultant in Public Health Medicine

Bridge of Allan Health Centre Bridge of Allan FK8 1TN
Department of Psychology University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA


Address correspondence to K. G. Power

BACKGROUND: Few studies have fully investigated and described the characteristics of non-responders in infant breast feeding studies. Examination of the characteristics of non-responders enhances this understanding and provides information on the representativeness of the sample actually investigated.

METHODS: As part of a larger local longitudinal study, couples whose babies were due to be born during the three months of the study in the autumn of 1995, at two local maternity hospitals, were approached by midwives to participate in the study of infant feeding patterns and determinants, including interviews, questionnaires and postal survey. From the 648 eligible mothers, 91 (14 per cent) were not approached, 233 (35.9 per cent) consented but were not interviewed, 256 (39.5 per cent) consented and were interviewed and 68 (10.5 per cent) refused to participate (non-responders) in the longitudinal study. To make a comparison between the ‘responders’ (i.e. the 233 who consented but were not interviewed and the 256 who consented and were interviewed) and non-responders (the 68 who refused to consent), appropriate data were collected on their socio-demographic characteristics, their feeding intentions and their feeding behaviour.

RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed a number of significant differences between responders and non-responders. However, log-linear analysis of these differences indicated that the main factors that differentiated between responders and non-responders were social class, smoking habit and actual feeding behaviour. When comparing the feeding intention at the time of ‘booking’, the non-responders compared with the responders were less likely to intend to breastfeed and more likely to be uncertain about their feeding intentions. Following delivery non-responders compared with responders were more likely to bottle feed their babies. By the time of discharge, of the non-responders, 83.6 per cent were bottle feeding in comparison with 47.3 per cent of responders who were also bottle feeding.

CONCLUSIONS: In this study non-responders were found to be more similar to bottle-feeding responders than to breastfeeding responders. Furthermore, non-responders were more likely to be smokers, from lower social class and to bottle feed. This study also showed that the non-responders were more undecided about their feeding intention at the time of the booking visit. Invariably a higher percentage of mothers who were undecided at the booking visit chose to bottle feed their babies at discharge. These results highlight the impact of failing to include information from non-responders when conducting research which examines patterns of infant breastfeeding and attitudes towards it.

Keywords: infant feeding, responders, non-responders


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Hum LactHome page
T. J. Clifford, M. K. Campbell, K. N. Speechley, and F. Gorodzinsky
Factors Influencing Full Breastfeeding in a Southwestern Ontario Community: Assessments at 1 Week and at 6 Months Postpartum
J Hum Lact, August 1, 2006; 22(3): 292 - 304.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J Hum LactHome page
C. L. Wagner, M. T. Wagner, M. Ebeling, K. G. Chatman, M. Cohen, and T. C. Hulsey
The Role of Personality and Other Factors in a Mother's Decision to Initiate Breastfeeding
J Hum Lact, February 1, 2006; 22(1): 16 - 26.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Pediatr Adolesc MedHome page
T. J. Clifford, M. K. Campbell, K. N. Speechley, and F. Gorodzinsky
Sequelae of Infant Colic: Evidence of Transient Infant Distress and Absence of Lasting Effects on Maternal Mental Health
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, December 1, 2002; 156(12): 1183 - 1188.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch. Dis. Child.Home page
A Schoetzau, U Gehring, K Franke, A Grubl, S Koletzko, A von Berg, D Berdel, D Reinhardt, C P Bauer, and H-E Wichmann
Maternal compliance with nutritional recommendations in an allergy preventive programme
Arch. Dis. Child., March 1, 2002; 86(3): 180 - 184.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.