Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 May 6;6(5):e010665.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010665.

How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6-8 months

Brittany J Morison  1 , Rachael W Taylor  2 , Jillian J Haszard  1 , Claire J Schramm  1 , Liz Williams Erickson  1 , Louise J Fangupo  1 , Elizabeth A Fleming  1 , Ashley Luciano  1 , Anne-Louise M Heath  1
Affiliations

How different are baby-led weaning and conventional complementary feeding? A cross-sectional study of infants aged 6-8 months

Brittany J Morison et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the food, nutrient and 'family meal' intakes of infants following baby-led weaning (BLW) with those of infants following a more traditional spoon-feeding (TSF) approach to complementary feeding.

Study design and participants: Cross-sectional study of dietary intake and feeding behaviours in 51 age-matched and sex-matched infants (n=25 BLW, 26 TSF) 6-8 months of age.

Methods: Parents completed a questionnaire, and weighed diet records (WDRs) on 1-3 non-consecutive days, to investigate food and nutrient intakes, the extent to which infants were self-fed or parent-fed, and infant involvement in 'family meals'.

Results: BLW infants were more likely than TSF infants to have fed themselves all or most of their food when starting complementary feeding (67% vs 8%, p<0.001). Although there was no statistically significant difference in the large number of infants consuming foods thought to pose a choking risk during the WDR (78% vs 58%, p=0.172), the CI was wide, so we cannot rule out increased odds with BLW (OR, 95% CI: 2.57, 0.63 to 10.44). No difference was observed in energy intake, but BLW infants appeared to consume more total (48% vs 42% energy, p<0.001) and saturated (22% vs 18% energy, p<0.001) fat, and less iron (1.6 vs 3.6 mg, p<0.001), zinc (3.0 vs 3.7 mg, p=0.001) and vitamin B12 (0.2 vs 0.5 μg, p<0.001) than TSF infants. BLW infants were more likely to eat with their family at lunch and at the evening meal (both p≤0.020).

Conclusions: Infants following BLW had similar energy intakes to those following TSF and were eating family meals more regularly, but appeared to have higher intakes of fat and saturated fat, and lower intakes of iron, zinc and vitamin B12. A high proportion of both groups were offered foods thought to pose a choking risk.

Keywords: baby-led weaning; complementary feeding; food intake; nutrient intake.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. World Health Organization. Infant and young feeding: model chapter for medical students and allied health professionals. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2009. - PubMed
    1. New Zealand Ministry of Health. Food and Nutrition Guidelines for healthy infants and toddlers (aged 0–2): a background paper. 4th edn Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Health, 2012.
    1. Cameron S, Heath AL, Taylor R. How feasible is baby-led weaning as an approach to infant feeding? A review of the evidence. Nutrients 2012;4:1575–609. 10.3390/nu4111575 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rapley G, Murkett T. Baby-led weaning: helping your baby love good food. London: Vermillion, 2008.
    1. World Health Organization. Guiding principles of complementary feeding of the breastfed child. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2004.

Publication types