The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pacifier Use, Early Weaning, and Cry/Fuss Behavior: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Abstract
CONTEXT: The World Health Organization and the United Nations Children's Fund strongly discourage use of pacifiers because of their perceived interference with breastfeeding. Observational studies have reported a strong association between pacifier use and early weaning, but such studies are unable to determine whether the association is causal. OBJECTIVES: To test whether regular pacifier use is causally related to weaning by 3 months postpartum and to examine differences in results according to randomized intervention allocation vs observational use or nonuse of pacifiers. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized controlled trial conducted from January 1998 to August 1999. SETTING: Postpartum unit of a university teaching hospital in Montreal, Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 281 healthy, breastfeeding women and their healthy, term singleton infants. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 counseling interventions provided by a research nurse trained in location counseling. The experimental intervention (n = 140) differed from the control (n = 141) by recommending avoidance of pacifier use and suggesting alternative ways to comfort a crying or fussing infant. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Early weaning, defined as weaning within the first 3 months, compared between groups; 24-hour infant behavior logs detailing frequency and duration of crying, fussing, and pacifier use at 4, 6, and 9 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 258 mother-infant pairs (91.8%) completed follow-up. The experimental intervention increased total avoidance of pacifier use (38.6% vs 16.0% in the control group), reduced daily use (40.8% vs 55.7%), and decreased the mean number of pacifier insertions per day (0.8 vs 2.4 at 4 weeks [P<.001]; 0.8 vs 3.0 at 6 weeks [P<.001]; and 1.3 vs 3.0 at 9 weeks [P =.004]). In the analysis based on randomized intervention allocation, the experimental intervention had no discernible effect on weaning at 3 months (18.9% vs 18.3% in the experimental vs control group; relative risk [RR], 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.7), and no effect was observed on cry/fuss behavior (in the experimental vs control groups, respectively, total daily duration, 143 vs 151 minutes at 4 weeks [P =.49]; 128 vs 131 minutes at 6 weeks [P =.81]; and 110 vs 104 minutes at 9 weeks [P =.58]). When randomized allocation was ignored, however, we observed a strong observational association between exposure to daily pacifier use and weaning by 3 months (25.0% vs 12.9% of the exposed vs unexposed groups; RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.3). CONCLUSIONS: We found a strong observational association between pacifier use and early weaning. No such association was observed, however, when our data were analyzed by randomized allocation, strongly suggesting that pacifier use is a marker of breastfeeding difficulties or reduced motivation to breastfeed, rather than a true cause of early weaning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs
Concato, J., Shah, N., & Horwitz, R. I. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200006223422507 · Cited by 3,563
A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials.
Benson, K., & Hartz, A. J. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200006223422506 · Cited by 2,347
Cited by
Task Force on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (2005) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2005-1499 · Cited by 526
Systematic review and meta-analysis: fussing and crying durations and prevalence of colic in infants
Wolke, D., Bilgin, A., & Samara, M. (2017) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.02.020 · Cited by 255
Gaps in the Evidence for Well-Child Care: A Challenge to Our Profession
Moyer, V. A., & Butler, M. (2004) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-1076 · Cited by 109
Risk Factors for Discontinuing Breastfeeding in Southern Brazil: A Survival Analysis
Feldens, C. A., Vitolo, M. R., Rauber, F., Cruz, L. N., & Hilgert, J. B. (2012) · Maternal and Child Health Journal · doi:10.1007/s10995-011-0885-7 · Cited by 72
Cumulative risks and cessation of exclusive breast feeding: Australian cross-sectional survey
Ayton, J., van der Mei, I., Wills, K., Hansen, E., & Nelson, M. (2015) · Archives of Disease in Childhood · doi:10.1136/archdischild-2014-307833 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Kramer, M. S.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2001-07-18
- Volume
- 286
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 322
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2067202605
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pacifier Use, Early Weaning, and Cry/Fuss Behavior: A Randomized Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.286.3.322
- The paper
- Kramer, M. S. (2001). Pacifier Use, Early Weaning, and Cry/Fuss Behavior: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.286.3.322
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.