A systematic evaluation and comparison of the consistency of infant safer sleep messaging in Australia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22092583 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sarah P Kruse (0000-0002-9581-5397, Monash University, corresponding author), Levita D’Souza (0000-0002-0325-8977, Monash University), Jeanine Young (0000-0003-3849-3392, University of the Sunshine Coast), Hannah G G Tuncer (0009-0004-1372-7396, Monash University) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 10 |
| Publication date | 2025-03-10 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Communication (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2297-900X • E-ISSN: 2297-900X |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fcomm.2025.1527164 |
| OpenAlex | W4408273002 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 49 |
To reduce the occurrence of sudden infant death, organisations have created recommendations about infant safer sleep and shared sleep. With the considerable volume of documents, consistency in messaging is paramount to reduce caregiver confusion and to reduce engagement in practices deemed to be unsafe for their infant. This review aimed to systematically compare documents that contain recommendations on infant safer sleep, including shared sleep, in Australia. Documents were identified by researchers with subject matter expertise, and through a systematic webpage search. A total of n = 32 eligible documents were included from n = 26 organisations. If an organisation had a separate document for shared sleeping, both documents were included and reviewed together. Consistency of recommendations were evaluated against the recommendations within the International Society for the Study and Prevention of Perinatal and Infant Death’s (ISPID)‘s guidelines, while the approach taken to discuss shared sleep from via Risk Minimisation vs. Risk Elimination was also evaluated using a coding framework. No organisation’s document/s contradicted ISPID’s guidelines, although there was variation in the quantity included. The approaches taken towards shared sleep by organisations were diverse between Risk Elimination and Risk Minimisation. Most organisations recommended that infants be breastfed but did not discuss the bi-directional link between breastfeeding and shared sleeping. Organisations need to provide consistent messaging on infant safer sleep to avoid public confusion. The adoption of a Risk Minimisation approach with clearer messaging provides considerations for informed choice, and strategies for safer shared sleeping; intentional or unintentional
Computer security · Data science · SAFER · Child Development and Digital Technology · Computer Science · Infant Health and Development · Neuroscience of respiration and sleep · Psychology · Artificial Intelligence
Sixty years of fear appeal research
Why invest, and what it will take to improve breastfeeding practices?
Online Health Information Seeking Behavior
The PRISMA 2020 statement
Understanding motivations and satisfaction with sleep location among co‐sleeping (including bed‐sharing) parents
Sources of attitudes towards parent–child co‐sleeping and their effects
Bed-Sharing in the First 8 Weeks of Life
Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data
Mother–infant cosleeping, breastfeeding and sudden infant death syndrome
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |