MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association Between Vitamin D Supplementation During Pregnancy and Offspring Growth, Morbidity, and Mortality

2018· review· en· W2805066346 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Pediatrics · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOffspringPregnancyVitaminPerinatal mortalityFetal growthPhysiologyPediatricsObstetricsEndocrinologyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Whether vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy is beneficial and safe for offspring is unclear. Objective: To systematically review studies of the effects of vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy on offspring growth, morbidity, and mortality. Data Sources: Searches of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were conducted up to October 31, 2017. Key search terms were vitamin D, pregnancy, randomized controlled trials, and offspring outcomes. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy and offspring outcomes. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two authors independently extracted data, and the quality of the studies was assessed. Summary risk ratio (RR), risk difference (RD) or mean difference (MD), and 95% CI were calculated using fixed-effects or random-effects meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were fetal or neonatal mortality, small for gestational age (SGA), congenital malformation, admission to a neonatal intensive care unit, birth weight, Apgar scores, neonatal 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and calcium concentrations, gestational age, preterm birth, infant anthropometry, and respiratory morbidity during childhood. Results: Twenty-four clinical trials involving 5405 participants met inclusion criteria. Vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy was associated with a lower risk of SGA (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.99; RD, -5.60%; 95% CI, -0.86% to -10.34%) without risk of fetal or neonatal mortality (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.11) or congenital abnormality (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.43). Neonates with prenatal vitamin D supplementation had higher 25(OH)D levels (MD, 13.50 ng/mL; 95% CI, 10.12 to 16.87 ng/mL), calcium levels (MD, 0.19 mg/dL; 95% CI, 0.003 to 0.38 mg/dL), and weight at birth (MD, 75.38 g; 95% CI, 22.88 to 127.88 g), 3 months (MD, 0.21 kg; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.28 kg), 6 months (MD, 0.46 kg; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.58 kg), 9 months (MD, 0.50 kg; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.99 kg), and 12 months (MD, 0.32 kg; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.52 kg). Subgroup analysis by doses showed that low-dose vitamin D supplementation (≤2000 IU/d) was associated with a reduced risk of fetal or neonatal mortality (RR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.80), but higher doses (>2000 IU/d) did not reduce this risk (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.54). Conclusions and Relevance: Vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy is associated with a reduced risk of SGA and improved infant growth without risk of fetal or neonatal mortality or congenital abnormality. Vitamin D supplementation with doses of 2000 IU/d or lower during pregnancy may reduce the risk of fetal or neonatal mortality.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.311 · 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