MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154769158 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuab004

Multiple-micronutrient supplementation in pregnant adolescents in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of individual participant data

2021· review· en· W3154769158 on OpenAlexaff
Emily C Keats, Nadia Akseer, Pravheen Thurairajah, Simon Cousens, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Hasmot Ali, Shams El Arifeen, Ulla Ashorn, José M. Belizán, Robert E. Black, Parul Christian, Luz Maria De‐Regil, Kathryn G. Dewey, Michael J. Dibley, Wafaie Fawzi, Henrik Friis, Exnevia Gomo, Lieven Huybregts, Renuka Jayatissa, Pernille Kæstel, Subarna K. Khatry, Patrick Kolsteren, Alain Labrique, Mary McCauley, Brietta M. Oaks, Ellen Piwoz, Saijuddin Shaikh, Damayanti Soekarjo, Christopher R. Sudfeld, Willy Urassa, Keith P. West, Lee Shu‐Fune Wu, Noël Zagré, Lingxia Zeng, Zhonghai Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoNutrition InternationalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsMeta-analysisMicronutrientLow and middle income countriesMedicineEnvironmental healthLow incomeDeveloping countryPsychologyPediatricsGerontologyBiologyInternal medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Approximately 7.3 million births occur annually among adolescents in low- and middle-income countries. Pregnant adolescents constitute a nutritionally vulnerable group that could benefit from intervention to mitigate the mortality and adverse birth outcomes associated with adolescent pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the following: (1) the effect of multiple-micronutrient (MMN) supplementation vs iron and folic acid (IFA) supplementation among adolescents on maternal morbidity, birth outcomes, and mortality outcomes, (2) the effects of MMN supplementation in adolescents compared with the effects in adult women, and (3) the effect modification, if any, of MMN supplementation by baseline and geographic characteristics of adolescents. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched, along with the reference lists of relevant reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Multiple-micronutrient supplementation trials in pregnancy that were conducted in a low- or middle-income country and had included at least 100 adolescents (10-19 years of age) were eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers assessed study eligibility. DATA EXTRACTION: Thirteen randomized controlled trials conducted in Africa and Asia were identified from 1792 reviews and 1578 original trials. Individual-level data was shared by study collaborators and was checked for completeness and extreme values. One- and two-stage individual participant data meta-analyses were conducted using data from randomized controlled trials of MMN supplementation. RESULTS: A total of 15 283 adolescents and 44 499 adult women with singleton births were included in the individual participant data meta-analyses of MMN supplementation vs IFA supplementation. In adolescents, MMN supplementation reduced low birth weight (1-stage OR = 0.87, 95%CI 0.77-0.97; 2-stage OR = 0.81; 95%CI 0.74-0.88), preterm birth (1-stage OR = 0.88, 95%CI 0.80-0.98; 2-stage OR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.79-0.95), and small-for-gestational-age births (1-stage OR = 0.90, 95%CI 0.81-1.00; 2-stage OR = 0.86, 95%CI 0.79-0.95) when compared with IFA supplementation. The effects of MMN supplementation did not differ between adolescents and older women, although a potentially greater reduction in small-for-gestational-age births was observed among adolescents. Effect modification by baseline characteristics and geographic region was inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple-micronutrient supplementation can improve birth outcomes among pregnant adolescents in low- and middle-income countries. Policy related to antenatal care in these settings should prioritize MMN supplementation over the currently recommended IFA supplementation for all pregnant women, especially adolescents.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicIron Metabolism and DisordersFrench-language works237,207