ORIGINAL ARTICLE

A systematic review of lay views about infant size and growth

P Lucas¹, L Arai², J Baird³, J Kleijnen⁴, C Law⁵, H Roberts²

¹ School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
² Child Health Research & Policy Unit, Institute of Health Sciences, City University, London, UK
³ MRC Epidemiology Resource Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
⁴ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
⁵ Centre for Paediatric Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Child Health, London, UK

Correspondence to:
Dr P Lucas
School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, 8 Priory Road, Bristol BS8 1TZ, UK; patricia.lucas{at}bristol.ac.uk

Objectives: To understand lay views on infant size and growth and their implications for a British population.

Methods: A systematic review of parental and other lay views about the meanings and importance of infant size and growth using Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, IBSS, ASSIA, British Nursing Index ChildData, Caredata, SIGLE, Dissertation Abstracts (US), Index to Theses. 19 studies, most of which reported the views of mothers, from the US, Canada, the UK and Finland were reviewed.

Results: Notions of healthy size and growth were dominated by the concept of normality. Participants created norms by assessing and comparing size and growth against several reference points. When size or growth differed from these norms, explanations were sought for factors that would account for this difference. When no plausible explanation could be found, growth or size became a worry for parents.

Conclusions: Parents consider the importance of contextual factors when judging what is appropriate or healthy growth. For public health advice to be effective, lay, as well as scientific, findings and values need to be considered.

Abbreviations: WIC, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Atoms

Howard Bauchner
Arch. Dis. Child. 2007 92: 95. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• (2009). Mothers' experiences of bottle-feeding: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies. Arch. Dis. Child. 94: 596-601  
• Petticrew, M, Egan, M, Thomson, H, Hamilton, V, Kunkler, R, Roberts, H (2008). Publication bias in qualitative research: what becomes of qualitative research presented at conferences?. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 62: 552-554 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Lucas, P., Law, C., Baird, J., Roberts, H. (2007). The views of professionals toward infant growth. Arch. Dis. Child. 92: 655-655 [Full Text]  
• Hughes, I (2007). Confusing terminology attempts to define the undefinable. Arch. Dis. Child. 92: 97-98 [Full Text]  
• Wright, C. M, Weaver, L. T (2007). Image or reality: why do infant size and growth matter to parents?. Arch. Dis. Child. 92: 98-100 [Full Text]