Effect of zinc supplementation on mental development and motor development in infants:a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess the efficacy of zinc supplementation for improving psychomotor developmental and mental developmental outcomes in infants younger than 3 years.Methods According to the requirements of Cochrane systematic review,a literature search was performed among PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane library,CNKI,VIP and Wanfang data from the establishment of the database till October 2010. Mental developmental index (MDI),psychomotor developmental index (PDI) and development quotient (DQ) of 6-36 months after birth were measured as therapeutic efficacy index.RevMan 5.0 software was used for meta-analysis. The Cochrane handbook 5.0.2 was used to evaluate the methodological quality. Data extraction,quality assessment,and meta-analysis for the results of homogeneous studies were performed by two reviewers. Heterogeneity of the included articles was tested to select proper effective model. Measurement data were expressed as SMD,WMD and its 95%CI.Results Eighty-four articles were searched according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,21 reviews,37 studies without zinc supplementation,5 studies for pregnant mothers,5 studies for children older than 3 years,1 study in which zinc supplementation was not the only different intervention compared with control group and 5 studies without the outcomes were excluded. Ten RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled. The assessment of literature quality showed 7 literatures described the method of random allocation in detail,8 literatures described allocation concealment,8 literatures used double blind method,9 literatures reported complete data addressed and 9 literatures were free of selectively reporting. Only 1 literature described the sources of other bias.There was clinical heterogeneity in the 10 included studies. Nine RCTs (n=2 250) reported PDI with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development or Griffiths Mental Development Scales. There was no significant difference in the PDI between two groups,SMD=0.15(95%CI:-0.12 to 0.42). Eight RCTs (n=2 136) reported MDI with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development. There was no significant difference in the MDI between two groups,WMD=-0.08(95%CI:-1.55 to 1.40). Subgroup analyses were carried out for dosage,formulation (zinc alone or zinc combined with other nutrients) and nutrition status (varying measles case fatality rates). None of these subgroup analyses showed significant difference in the MDI or PDI between groups. One RCT (n=114) reported DQ using the Griffiths Mental Development Scales. The WMD of DQ was-0.72 (95%CI:-7.97 to 6.53). Another RCT (n=70) reported the change in Alberta Infant Motor Scale and did not show significant difference between groups,WMD=0.30(95%CI:-2.09 to 2.69).Conclusions Supplementation of zinc shows no effect on psychomotor development and mental development in infants. Further studies are needed to determine whether the findings are reproducible.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".