Breastfeeding on health: a Living Overview of the Evidence (L-OVE)

Article type
Authors
Baladia E1, Marqués M1, Martínez-Rodríguez R1, Martínez P2, Garroz R1, Almendra-Pegueros R3, Bustos J1, Buhring K4, Camacho S5, Aguilar Barrera E6, Osuna I7, Pérez M8, Rada G8
1Red de Nutrición Basada en la Evidencia, Academia Española de Nutrición y Dietética
2Grupo de Investigación Techné, Ingeniería del conocimiento y del Producto, Universidad de Granada
3Laboratorio de Investigación Traslacional en Farmacología, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí
4Universidad Andres Bello
5Nutrir México
6Instituto Politécnico Nacional, CICS-UMA
7Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias
8Epistemonikos Foundation
Abstract
Background: the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends exclusive breastfeeding until six months of age, and continuing breastfeeding until at least two years of age. However, the rates of exclusive breastfeeding and mixed feeding are still low worldwide. The scientific community and the immediate environment of the women who wish to breastfeed are determinant to support its implementation and ensure the continuity of breastfeeding. The knowledge of the best scientific evidence on breastfeeding is vital to promote better decisions at all levels. The aim of this project is to create a living overview of systematic reviews that will enable access to the best available evidence in breastfeeding.

Methods: a living overview of systematic reviews on breastfeeding that evaluated its effect on maternal and infant health, as well as the strategies directed to promote the initiation and continuation of breastfeeding, was performed. The research was conducted through a search engine for the Epistemonikos database, which collects systematic reviews from 10 databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, DARE, Campbell Library, JBI, EPPI library) with collaboration between humans and machine learning. There are no deadlines since the searches are performed weekly and the new reviews are incorporated at the earliest opportunity. A double-blind peer review was conducted using the Epistemonikos’ Collaboraton tool. The reviews were categorized according to their appropriate, predetermined PICOT question (Participants, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Time), and there was assessment of certainty following the GRADE guidelines.

Results: this project is within its early stages and only partial results of the work undertaken can be presented. On 24 April 2019, the number of potentially eligible systematic reviews retrieved was 2147, of which 1515 have been screened, with 735 already included by at least two reviewers (632 still pending). Currently, the classification of systematic reviews into different questions or topics of interest is beginning.

Discussion: the maintenance of a living overview of systematic reviews where humans and robots collaborate, will enable access to the best available evidence in real time; at its core are systematic reviews with assessment of certainty done with GRADE, and created through an international collaborative system.