Maternal Multiple Micronutrient Supplementation and Children's Cognition at Age 9‐12 Years in Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many micronutrients, including zinc, iodine, and B‐vitamins, are needed for the rapid brain development that occurs during gestation and infancy, laying a foundation for lifelong brain function. Few studies have examined the long‐term cognitive effects of maternal multiple micronutrient (MMN) supplements, compared to the current practice in many countries of iron and folic acid (IFA) supplementation. In 2001‐2004, in the SUMMIT trial, midwives in Indonesia were randomly assigned to distribute daily IFA or MMN from pregnancy through three months postpartum. We tested 3687 children of SUMMIT participants at 9‐12 years of age. Adjusting for midwife cluster, data collector, child age and gender, and home environment, children of mothers given MMN scored higher in visual attention (B=0.11, p < .01) and arithmetic (B=0.10, p=.05) compared to IFA. We observed positive effects on verbal ability (B=0.17, p=.02) in children of mothers who were undernourished at enrollment and on sustained attention (B=0.10, p=.04) and letter/word recognition (B=0.23, p=.04) in children of mothers who were anemic, consistent with previously observed effects on pre‐school cognition in these groups. We found positive effects on speed of sentence reading in children of well‐nourished mothers (B=0.11, p = .04), consistent with effects on birth weight in this group. No effects were found on fine motor ability, socio‐emotional scores, or several measures of executive function. Funded by Grand Challenges Canada
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".