Biology subjects

Alemu, S. M.

Publications and source records attributed to Alemu, S. M..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2018

Association of age and colostrum discarding with breastfeeding in Ethiopia: systematic review and meta-analyses

IntroductionEven though optimal breastfeeding is important, significantly low percentage of mothers initiate breastfeeding timely and maintain exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months. The aim of this meta-analyses and systematic review was to investigate whether maternal/caregivers age, infant age (0-6 months) and discarding colostrum affects timely initiation of breastfeeding (TIBF) and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) in Ethiopia.\n\nMethodsA systematic search of PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, CINHAL, Web of Science and WHO Global Health Library electronic databases was done for all English published articles from 2000 to January 2018, supplemented by manual search of identified articles and grey literatures bibliographies. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted and graded the quality studies using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 and Cochran Chi-square statistics. A weighted inverse variance random-effects model meta-analysis was done.\n\nResultA total of 37 articles (i.e., 14 studies on TIBF and 23 on EBF) were included. TIBF was associated with colostrum discarding (Odds ratio (OR) = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.21-0.68) but not with maternal/caregivers age (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.83-1.15). In addition, colostrum discarding (OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.37-0.84) and infant age (OR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.45-2.39) were significantly associated with EBF but not maternal/caregivers age (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.81-1.40).\n\nConclusionThis meta-analyses indicated absence of association between maternal/caregivers age and breastfeeding practice. Colostrum discarding was associated with both EBF and TIBE. This evidence could be helpful to counsel all reproductive age mothers and who discard colostrum.

epidemiology↗

bioRxiv2018

What is the impact of gender of new-born, antenatal care and postnatal care on breastfeeding practices in Ethiopia? A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the association of gender of new-born, antenatal care (ANC) and postnatal care (PNC) with timely initiation of breastfeeding (TIBF) and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) practice in Ethiopia.\n\nDesignSystematic review and meta-analysis\n\nMethodsPubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, WHO Global Health Library, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases systematically searched and complemented by manual searches to retrieve all available literature. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used for quality assessment of included studies. Eggers regression test at p-value threshold [≤] 0.01 was used to examine publication bias. Cochrans Q X2 test, {tau}2, and I2 statistics were used to test heterogeneity, estimate amount of total/residual heterogeneity and measure variability attributed to heterogeneity respectively. A meta-analysis using a weighted inverse variance random-effects model was performed. The trend of evidence over time was evaluated by performing a cumulative meta-analysis. Furthermore, mixed-effects meta-regression analysis was done to identify possible sources of heterogeneity.\n\nResultsOf 523 articles retrieved, 17 studies (N = 26,146 mothers) on TIBF and 27 studies (N = 17,819 mothers) on EBF were included in the final analysis. ANC (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.65 -3.04, p <0.001, I2 = 90.9%), PNC (OR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.41 - 2.47, p <0.001, I2 = 63.4%) and gender of new-born (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.01 - 1.68, p = 0.04, I2 = 81.7%) significantly associated with EBF. In addition, ANC (OR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.10 - 2.65, p = 0.02, I2 = 93.1%) was significantly associated with TIBF but not gender of new-born (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.86 -1.21, p = 0.82, I2 = 66.2%).\n\nConclusionsIn line with our hypothesis, gender of new-born, ANC and PNC significantly associated with EBF. Likewise, ANC significantly associated with TIBF. Optimal care during pregnancy and after birth is important to ensure adequate breastfeeding. This meta-analysis study provided evidence on breastfeeding practices and its associated factors in Ethiopian context, which can be useful for cross-country and cross-cultural comparison and for breastfeeding improvement initiative in Ethiopia.\n\nProtocol registration and publicationCRD42017056768 and 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2017-017437\n\nStrengths and limitations of this studyO_LIThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted based on the registered and published protocol.\nC_LIO_LISince it is the first study in Ethiopia, the information could be helpful for future researchers, public health practitioners, and healthcare policymakers.\nC_LIO_LIAlmost all included studies were observational which may hinder causality inference.\nC_LIO_LIPerhaps the results may not be nationally representative given that studies from some regions are lacking.\nC_LIO_LIBased on the conventional methods of the heterogeneity test, a few analyses suffer from high between-study variation.\nC_LI

epidemiology↗

bioRxiv2018

Overview of biomedical and public health reviews in Ethiopia from 1970 to 2018: trends, methodological qualities, gaps and future directions

IntroductionGlobally, there has been a dramatic increment of narrative reviews, systematic reviews and overview publication rates. In Ethiopia, only small number of reviews are published and no overviews conducted in biomedical and public health disciplines. Therefore, we aimed to (1) assess the trend of narrative and systematic reviews in Ethiopia, (2) examine their methodological quality and (3) suggest future directions for improvement.\n\nMethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, CINHAL, WHO Global Index Medicus, Cochrane Library and PsycINFO electronic databases were searched and supplemented by hand searching as well. All narrative reviews and systematic reviews with or without a meta-analysis from 1970 to April 2018 were included. The International Narrative Systematic assessment (INSA) for narrative reviews and A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) for systematic reviews with or without a meta-analysis were used for quality appraisal. Fishers exact test at the p-value threshold of 0.05 was used to compare the differences in methodological quality.\n\nResultsOf the 2,201 initially identified articles, 106 articles published from 1970 to 2018 were eligible for full-text review. Among included reviews, 50.9% were narrative reviews, 16% were systematic reviews and 33.1% were systematic reviews with meta-analyses. Twenty-nine percent were published in Ethiopia and 43.4% were published after 2015. 85.1% of narrative reviews poorly described the characteristics of included studies and 63.8% did not report a conflict of interest. In systematic reviews, 89.6%, 91.7%, and 100% did not register/publish the protocol, justifying the selection of the study designs for inclusion and report sources of funding for the primary studies respectively. Overall, 55.3% of narrative reviews and 75% of systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis had poor methodological quality.\n\nConclusionsAlthough publication rate of narrative and systematic reviews have risen in Ethiopia, half of the narrative reviews and three-quarters of the systematic reviews had poor methodological quality. We recommend authors to strictly follow standardized quality assessment tools during conducting reviews. Moreover, immediate interventions such as providing methodological training and employers, editors and peer-reviewers should carefully evaluate all reviews before submission or publication.\n\nWhat is new?O_ST_ABSKey findingsC_ST_ABSO_LIThe publication rate of narrative and systematic reviews have risen in Ethiopia.\nC_LIO_LIAlmost half of narrative reviews and three-fourths of systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis had poor scientific methodological quality.\nC_LI\n\nWhat this adds to what is knownO_LITo our knowledge, this is the first overview of its kind providing insight into the publication trend of narrative and systematic reviews, and their methodological rigor in Ethiopia.\nC_LI\n\nWhat is the implication, what should change nowO_LIOur review shows that the methodological quality of reviews in biomedical and public health discipline in Ethiopia is substantially low and urges immediate intervention.\nC_LIO_LIWe recommended authors to strictly follow standardized quality assessment tools during designing, conducting and reporting (systematic)reviews.\nC_LI

scientific communication and education↗