AkseerN.WrightJ.TasicH.EverettK.ScudderE.AmsaluR.TiesB.BendavidE.KamaliM.BarrosA. J. D.da SilvaI. C. M.BhuttaZ. A. (2020). Women, children and adolescents in conflict countries: An assessment of inequalities in intervention coverage and survival. BMJ Global Health, 5, e002214. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002214
2.
AmirL. H. (2014). Managing common breastfeeding problems in the community. BMJ, 12(348), g2954. doi:10.1136/bmj.g2954
3.
ArbourM. W.KesslerJ. L. (2013). Mammary hypoplasia: Not every breast can produce sufficient milk. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 58(4), 457–461. doi:10.1111/jmwh.12070
4.
Armstrong-WellsJ.GoldenbergN. A. (2011). Institution-based prospective inception cohort studies in neonatal rare disease research. Seminars in Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 16(6), 355–358. doi:10.1016/j.siny.2011.07.004
5.
BassaneseG.WlodkowskiT.ServaisA.HeidetL.RoccatelloD.EmmaF.LevtchenkoE.AricetaG.BacchettaJ.CapassoG.JankauskieneA.MiglinasM.FerraroP. M.MontiniG.OhJ.DecramerS.LevartT. K.WetzelsJ.CornelissenE.DevuystO., . . . SchaeferF. (2021). The European Rare Kidney Disease Registry (ERKReg): Objectives, design and initial results. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 16, 251. doi:10.1186/s13023-021-01872-8
6.
BelbasisL.BellouV. (2018). Introduction to epidemiological studies. Methods in Molecular Biology, 1793, 1–6. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-7868-7_1
7.
BolignanoD.PisanoA. (2016). Good-quality research in rare diseases: trials and tribulations. Pediatric Nephrology, 31(11), 2017–2023. doi:10.1007/s00467-016-3323-7
8.
BosdrieszJ. R.StelV. S.van DiepenM.MeulemanY.DekkerF. W.ZoccaliC.JagerK. J. (2020). Evidence-based medicine-when observational studies are better than randomized controlled trials. Nephrology, 25(10), 737–743. doi:10.1111/nep.13742
9.
CareyJ. C. (2010). The importance of case reports in advancing scientific knowledge of rare diseases. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 686, 77–86. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-9485-8_5
10.
CarlsonM. D.MorrisonR. S. (2009). Study design, precision, and validity in observational studies. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 12(1), 77–82. doi:10.1089/jpm.2008.9690
11.
CarneiroI. (2011a). Case-control studies. In HowardN. (Ed.), Introduction to Epidemiology (2nd ed., pp. 110–117). Open University Press.
12.
CarneiroI. (2011b). Cohort studies. In HowardN. (Ed.), Introduction to Epidemiology (2nd ed., pp. 100–109). Open University Press.
13.
CarneiroI. (2011c). Cross-sectional studies. In HowardN. (Ed.), Introduction to Epidemiology (2nd ed., pp. 93–99). Open University Press.
14.
CarneiroI. (2011d). Ecological studies. In HowardN. (Ed.), Introduction to Epidemiology (2nd ed., pp. 75–92).
15.
CataldoR.ArancibiaM.StojanovaJ.PapuzinskiC. (2019). General concepts in biostatistics and clinical epidemiology: Observational studies with cross-sectional and ecological designs. Medwave, 19(8), e7698. doi:10.5867/medwave.2019.08.7698
16.
DodgsonJ. E. (2020). Developing a lactation case report or is it a case study?Journal of Human Lactation, 36(3), 404–409. doi:10.1177/0890334420926936
17.
FairD.PotterS. L.VenkatramaniR. (2020). Challenges and solutions to the study of rare childhood tumors. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 32(1), 7–12. doi:10.1097/MOP.0000000000000857
18.
GreenlandS.SennS. J.RothmanK. J.CarlinJ. B.PooleC.GoodmanS. N.AltmanD. G. (2016). Statistical tests, P-values, confidence intervals and power: A guide to misinterpretations. European Journal of Epidemiology31(4), 337-350. doi:10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3
19.
GuyattG.SackettD.SinclairJ.HaywardR.CookD.CookR.BassE.GersteinH.HaynesB.HolbrookA.JaeschkeR.LaupaclsA.MoyerV.WilsonM. (1995). Users’ guides to the medical literature: IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. JAMA, 274, 1800–1804. doi:10.1001/jama.274.22.1800
20.
HarveyL. A. (2019). Case-control studies: an efficient study design. Spinal Cord, 57(6), 1–2. doi:10.1038/s41393-018-0234-4
21.
HugginsK. E.PetokE. S.MirelesO. (2000). Markers of lactation insufficiency: A study of 34 mothers. Current Issues in Clinical Lactation, 1, 25–35.
22.
HunterM.JohnsonN. E. (2018). The difficulties and importance of research in rare genetic diseases. Muscle & Nerve, 57(4), 520–521. doi:10.1002/mus.26043
23.
KamR. L.AmirL. H.CullinaneM. (2021a). Is there an association between breast hypoplasia and breastfeeding outcomes? A systematic review. Breastfeeding Medicine. doi:10.1089/bfm.2021.0032
24.
KamR.L.AmirL. H.CullinaneM. (2021b). Worldwide prevalence of breast hypoplasia: A systematic review. Breastfeeding Review. Manuscript submitted for publication.
25.
KamR. L.IngmanW. V.BernhardtS. M.AmirL. H. (2021c). Modern, exogenous exposures associated with altered mammary gland development: a systematic review. Early Human Development, 156, 105342. doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2021.105342
26.
KesmodelU. S. (2018). Cross-sectional studies—What are they good for?Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 97(4), 388–393. doi:10.1111/aogs.13331
27.
LevinK. A. (2006). Study design VI – Ecological studies. Evidence-Based Dentistry, 7(4), 108. doi:10.1038/sj.ebd.6400454
28.
MarascoL. A. (2014). Unsolved mysteries of the human mammary gland: Defining and redefining the critical questions from the lactation consultant’s perspective. Journal of Mammary Gland Biology and Neoplasia, 19(3–4), 271–288. doi:10.1007/s10911-015-9330-7
29.
MathesT.PieperD. (2017). Clarifying the distinction between case series and cohort studies in systematic reviews of comparative studies: Potential impact on body of evidence and workload. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 17, 107. doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0391-8
30.
McGuireE.RowanM. K. (2015). PCOS, breast hypoplasia and low milk supply: A case study. Breastfeeding Review, 23(3), 29–32.
31.
Nestler-ParrS.KorchaginaD.ToumiM.PashosC. L.BlanchetteC.MolsenE.MorelT.SimoensS.KaloZ.GatermannR.RedekopW. (2018). Challenges in research and health technology assessment of rare disease technologies: Report of the ISPOR rare disease special interest group. Value in Health, 21(5), 493–500. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2018.03.004
32.
NewbyR. M.DaviesP. S. (2016). Why do women stop breast-feeding? Results from a contemporary prospective study in a cohort of Australian women. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 70(12), 1428–1432. doi:10.1038/ejcn.2016.157
33.
RathA.SalamonV.PeixotoS.HivertV.LavilleM.SegrestinB.NeugebauerE. A. M.EikermannM.BerteleV.GarattiniS.WetterslevJ.BanziR.JakobsenJ. C.DjurisicS.KubiakC.Demotes-MainardJ.GluudC. (2017). A systematic literature review of evidence-based clinical practice for rare diseases: What are the perceived and real barriers for improving the evidence and how can they be overcome?Trials, 18, 556. doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2287-7
34.
RichterT.Nestler-ParrS.BabelaR.KhanZ. M.TesoroT.MolsenE.HughesD. A.International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Rare Disease Special Interest Group. (2015). Rare disease terminology and definitions—A systematic global review: Report of the ISPOR rare disease special interest group. Value in Health, 18(6), 906–914. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2015.05.008
35.
RiddleS. W.Nommsen-RiversL. A. (2016). A case control study of diabetes during pregnancy and low milk supply. Breastfeeding Medicine, 11(2), 80–85. doi:10.1089/bfm.2015.0120
36.
SongJ. W.ChungK. C. (2010). Observational studies: Cohort and case-control studies. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 126(6), 2234–2242. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f44abc
37.
SterneJ. A. C.SavovićJ.PageM. J.ElbersR. G.BlencoweN. S.BoutronI.CatesC. J.ChengH-Y.CorbettM. S.EldridgeS. M.HernánM. A.HopewellS.HróbjartssonA.JunqueiraD. R.JüniP.KirkhamJ. J.LassersonT.LiT.McAleenanA.ReevesB. C.ShepperdS., . . . HigginsJ. P. T. (2019). RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ366, l4898. doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898
38.
SesslerD. I.ImreyP. B. (2015). Clinical Research Methodology 3: Randomized controlled trials. Anaesthesia & Analgesia121(4), 1052–1064. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000000862
39.
StuebeA. M.HortonB. J.ChetwyndE.WatkinsS.GrewenK.Meltzer-BrodyS. (2014). Prevalence and risk factors for early, undesired weaning attributed to lactation dysfunction. Journal of Women’s Health, 23(5), 404–412. doi:10.1089/jwh.2013.4506
40.
TingleyK.CoyleD.GrahamI. D.SikoraL.ChakrabortyP.WilsonK.MitchellJ. J.Stockler-IpsirogluS.PotterB. K.Canadian Inherited Metabolic Diseases ResearchN. (2018). Using a meta-narrative literature review and focus groups with key stakeholders to identify perceived challenges and solutions for generating robust evidence on the effectiveness of treatments for rare diseases. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 13, 104. doi:10.1186/s13023-018-0851-1
41.
VetterT. R.MaschaE. J. (2017). Bias, confounding, and interaction: Lions and tigers, and bears, oh my!Anesthesia & Analgesia, 125(3), 1042–1048. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000002332
42.
VictoraC. G.BahlR.BarrosA. J.FrancaG. V.HortonS.KrasevecJ.MurchS.SankarM. J.WalkerN.RollinsN. C., & Lancet Breastfeeding Series Group. (2016). Breastfeeding in the 21st century: Epidemiology, mechanisms, and lifelong effect. Lancet, 387(10017), 475–490. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01024-7
43.
WagnerE. A.ChantryC. J.DeweyK. G.Nommsen-RiversL. A. (2013). Breastfeeding concerns at 3 and 7 days postpartum and feeding status at 2 months. Pediatrics, 132(4), e865–875. doi:10.1542/peds.2013-0724
44.
WebbP.BainC. (2011). Reading between the lines: Reading and writing epidemiological papers. In WebbP.BainC. (Eds.), Essential Epidemiology: An Introduction for Students and Health Professionals (2nd ed., pp. 221–235). Cambridge University Press.
45.
WhitakerC.StevelinkS.FearN. (2017). The use of Facebook in recruiting participants for health research purposes: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(8), e290. doi:10.2196.jmir.7071
46.
WinocourS.LemaineV. (2013). Hypoplastic breast anomalies in the female adolescent breast. Seminars in Plastic Surgery, 27(1), 42–48. doi:10.1055/s-0033-1343996