Neonatal Nutrition Predicts Energy Balance in Young Adults Born Preterm at Very Low Birth Weight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiological studies and animal models suggest that early postnatal nutrition and growth can influence adult health. However, few human studies have objective recordings of early nutrient intake. We studied whether nutrient intake and growth during the first 9 weeks after preterm birth with very low birth weight (VLBW, <1500 g) predict total energy intake, resting energy expenditure (REE), physical activity and food preferences in young adulthood. We collected daily nutritional intakes and weights during the initial hospital stay from hospital records for 127 unimpaired VLBW participants. At an average age 22.5 years, they completed a three-day food record and a physical activity questionnaire and underwent measurements of body composition (dual X-ray absorptiometry; n = 115 with adequate data) and REE (n = 92 with adequate data). We used linear regression and path analysis to investigate associations between neonatal nutrient intake and adult outcomes. Higher energy, protein and fat intakes during the first three weeks of life predicted lower relative (=per unit lean body mass) energy intake and relative REE in adulthood, independent of other pre- and neonatal factors. In path analysis, total effects of early nutrition and growth on relative energy intake were mostly explained by direct effects of early life nutrition. A path mediated by early growth reached statistical significance only for protein intake. There were no associations of neonatal intakes with physical activity or food preferences in adulthood. As a conclusion, higher intake of energy and nutrients during first three weeks of life of VLBW infants predicts energy balance after 20 years. This association is partly mediated through postnatal growth.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".