Low-dose thiamine supplementation of lactating Cambodian mothers improves human milk thiamine concentrations: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Infantile beriberi-related mortality is still common in South and Southeast Asia. Interventions to increase maternal thiamine intakes, and thus human milk thiamine, are warranted; however, the required dose remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: We sought to estimate the dose at which additional maternal intake of oral thiamine no longer meaningfully increased milk thiamine concentrations in infants at 24 wk postpartum, and to investigate the impact of 4 thiamine supplementation doses on milk and blood thiamine status biomarkers. METHODS: In this double-blind, 4-parallel arm randomized controlled dose-response trial, healthy mothers were recruited in Kampong Thom, Cambodia. At 2 wk postpartum, women were randomly assigned to consume 1 capsule, containing 0, 1.2 (estimated average requirement), 2.4, or 10 mg of thiamine daily from 2 through 24 weeks postpartum. Human milk total thiamine concentrations were measured using HPLC. An Emax curve was plotted, which was estimated using a nonlinear least squares model in an intention-to-treat analysis. Linear mixed-effects models were used to test for differences between treatment groups. Maternal and infant blood thiamine biomarkers were also assessed. RESULTS: In total, each of 335 women was randomly assigned to1 of the following thiamine-dose groups: placebo (n = 83), 1.2 mg (n = 86), 2.4 mg (n = 81), and 10 mg (n = 85). The estimated dose required to reach 90% of the maximum average total thiamine concentration in human milk (191 µg/L) is 2.35 (95% CI: 0.58, 7.01) mg/d. The mean ± SD milk thiamine concentrations were significantly higher in all intervention groups (183 ± 91, 190 ± 105, and 206 ± 89 µg/L for 1.2, 2.4, and 10 mg, respectively) compared with the placebo group (153 ± 85 µg/L; P < 0.0001) and did not significantly differ from each other. CONCLUSIONS: A supplemental thiamine dose of 2.35 mg/d was required to achieve a milk total thiamine concentration of 191 µg/L. However, 1.2 mg/d for 22 wk was sufficient to increase milk thiamine concentrations to similar levels achieved by higher supplementation doses (2.4 and 10 mg/d), and comparable to those of healthy mothers in regions without beriberi. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03616288.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".