MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2552295675 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0165626

New Perspective on Impact of Folic Acid Supplementation during Pregnancy on Neurodevelopment/Autism in the Offspring Children – A Systematic Review

2016· review· en· W2552295675 on OpenAlexafffund
Yunfei Gao, Chao Sheng, Ri‐hua Xie, Wen Sun, Elizabeth Asztalos, Diane Moddemann, Lonnie Zwaigenbaum, Mark Walker, Shi Wu Wen

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of ManitobaOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAutismPregnancyMedicineFolic acid supplementationOffspringPediatricsGestationCochrane LibraryMEDLINEBioinformaticsPsychiatryFolic acidRandomized controlled trialPathologyInternal medicineBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been conclusively established that folic acid supplementation prior to and during early pregnancy (up to 12 weeks of gestation) can prevent neural tube defects (NTDs). We hypothesized that folate effects may extend from neuro-structural defects to alterations in neuro-behavioural and emotional skills including autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) and other developmental disorders. The objective of this review was to comprehensively evaluate evidence on the impact of folic acid on neurodevelopment other than NTDs. We conducted an online search of relevant literature compiled by the National Library of Medicine from Medline and EMBASE (searched on Dec 31, 2014: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query/fcgi and http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/embase). We first created 3 files (search restricted to English literature) using the following key words: 1) folate or folic acid (171322 papers identified by this search); 2) maternal or pregnancy or pregnant or gestation or gestational or prenatal or antenatal or periconception or periconceptional (1349219 papers identified by this search); and 3) autism or autism spectrum disorders or developmental delay or development or neurodevelopment or mental or cognitive or language or personal-social or gross motor or fine motor or behaviour or intellectual or intelligence or Bayley Scale (8268145 papers identified by this search). We then merged the 3 files and reviewed the papers that addressed these three issues simultaneously. A total of 22 original papers that examined the association between folic acid supplementation in human pregnancy and neurodevelopment/autism were identified after the screening, with 15 studies showing a beneficial effect of folic acid supplementation on neurodevelopment/autism, 6 studies showed no statistically significant difference, while one study showed a harmful effect in > 5 mg folic acid supplementation/day during pregnancy. Folic acid supplementation in pregnancy may have beneficial effects on the neurodevelopment of children beyond its proven effect on NTDs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations140
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207