MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2161829837 · doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0011

The Folate Debate

2006· letter· en· W2161829837 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert L. Brent, Godfrey P. Oakley

Notice bibliographique

RevuePEDIATRICS · 2006
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueFolate and B Vitamins Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineSpina bifidaAnencephalyFolic acidMicronutrientVitaminEnvironmental healthPediatricsPregnancyFetus

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

No infant anywhere in the world should die from anencephaly or be paralyzed by spina bifida because he or she was conceived and developed in a folate-deficient environment.1,2 The Medical Research Council Vitamin Study Research Group's randomized, controlled trial showed in 1991 that pregnant women who consume enough synthetic folic acid before and during the early weeks of pregnancy do not have infants with folic acid–preventable spina bifida and anencephaly.3 There has been unconscionable and unnecessary delay in the implementation of the public health and nutrition policies and programs necessary to prevent all of these preventable birth defects.2,4–8 As a result of these delays, ∼3 million children have been unnecessarily paralyzed or have died. It is past the time when all governments should have implemented programs to prevent all folic acid–preventable spina bifida and anencephaly.A group of scientists, parents, and policy advocates met at the Ottawa, Canada, headquarters of Micronutrient Initiative and produced recommendations for increasing the pace for prevention of folic acid–preventable spina bifida and other folic acid–preventable diseases. They recommended mandatory folic acid flour fortification as the foundation on which to build this birth defects–prevention program, because in many countries the consumption of wheat and/or corn flour provides the opportunity to prevent birth defects by requiring mills to fortify flour with folic acid.8In the United States, consumption of wheat and corn flour with adequate enrichment of folic acid can provide the opportunity for near-total, if not total, prevention of these severe birth defects that are preventable through fortification. The decision of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require “folic acid–enriched” grain products such as wheat and corn flour provided the basis for a marked improvement of public health and has provided an example that ∼40 countries have emulated.In their special article in this issue of Pediatrics, Rader and Schneeman9 note the improvement in serum and red cell folates that occurred after fortification, yet they write that “it is not possible to determine if these values are sufficiently high to protect all women at risk.” Said another way, we do not have the evidence that would permit us to conclude that the developing embryos of all pregnant women are being protected; therefore, we do not have the evidence to conclude that all folic acid–preventable spina bifida and anencephaly are being prevented.The current US Public Health Service and the current Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations are that all women of reproductive age should consume 400 μg of synthetic folic acid daily to prevent these birth defects.10,11 There is evidence to suggest that the median folic acid consumption of women of reproductive age may be as much as 200 μg of synthetic folic acid per day postfortification,12,13 which means that most women are not getting the 400 μg that is recommended. Increasing the concentration of folic acid required in “enriched” grains would increase the proportion of women who would consume the recommended amount of folic acid and increase the prevention of folic acid–preventable neural tube defects. We may not know the exact number of cases of spina bifida and anencephaly that would be prevented by increasing fortification; however, that fact should not stop the FDA from moving quickly to require an increase in the concentration of folic acid.We encourage the FDA to implement a process that would provide for an open, fair, and rapid assessment of the available data and consider implementing the recommendations of the IOM for folic acid intake through fortification of enriched cereal grains. The primary question to be addressed should be, what additional contributions to the total prevention of folic acid–preventable spina bifida should the FDA initiate through changes in enrichment regulations? Because the IOM has recommended that all people ≥50 years consume 2.4 μg of synthetic vitamin B12 to prevent vitamin B12 deficiency, the review should also deliberate the issue of vitamin B12 deficiency and determine what contribution to preventing vitamin B12 deficiency the FDA can make by requiring the addition of vitamin B12 in enriched grains.11 We think that when such a review is completed, the FDA will increase the folic acid concentration in enriched grains and require that vitamin B12 be added.14 These actions would improve the health of our nation's children and adults.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,030
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,102

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,023
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,013
Communication savante0,0070,013
Science ouverte0,0020,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0220,015
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0300,008

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,284
Écart entre enseignants0,264 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations12
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePEDIATRICSMême sujetFolate and B Vitamins ResearchTravaux en français237 207