A Docosahexaenoic Acid‐Functional Food During Pregnancy Benefits Infant Visual Acuity at Four but not Six Months of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within the visual system, docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6n-3) is an important structural component for retinal photoreceptors and cortical gray matter. There is a marked decrease in neural DHA accumulation in the face of DHA deficiency. DHA is accumulated at an accelerated rate during pregnancy, especially in the third trimester. However, pregnant women in the US and Canada have dietary DHA intakes that are significantly below the optimal level. The main objective of this study was to determine whether a DHA-functional food during pregnancy would benefit infant visual acuity at four and six months of age measured behaviorally using the acuity card procedure (ACP). In a randomized, longitudinal, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled trial, 30 pregnant women received either the DHA-functional food (n = 16) or the placebo (n = 14). There were significant main effects for visual acuity at four months of age (P = 0.018). The mean acuity scores were 3.8 +/- 1.1 cycles/degree in the DHA group versus 3.2 +/- 0.7 cycles/degree in the placebo group. At six months there were no group differences. Based on our results, we conclude that DHA supplemented during pregnancy plays a role in the maturation of the visual system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".