MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161556645 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100905

Higher dose docosahexaenoic acid supplementation during pregnancy and early preterm birth: A randomised, double-blind, adaptive-design superiority trial

2021· article· en· W3161556645 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentDSMDSM Nutritional ProductsNational Institutes of HealthDiagnostic Services ManitobaUniversity of Cincinnati
KeywordsMedicineDocosahexaenoic acidPregnancyGestationRandomizationRandomized controlled trialObstetricsLive birthClinical endpointGestational agePediatricsInternal medicineFatty acidPolyunsaturated fatty acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Several meta analyses have concluded n-3 fatty acids, including docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), reduce early preterm birth (EPB, < 34 weeks), however, the amount of DHA required is unclear. We hypothesized that 1000 mg DHA per day would be superior to 200 mg, the amount in most prenatal supplements. METHODS: This randomised, multicentre, double-blind, adaptive-design, superiority trial was conducted in three USA medical centres. Women with singleton pregnancies and 12 to 20 weeks gestation were eligible. randomization was generated in SAS® by site in blocks of 4. The planned adaptive design periodically generated allocation ratios favoring the better performing dose. Managing study personnel were blind to treatment until 30 days after the last birth. The primary outcome was EPB by dose and by enrolment DHA status (low/high). Bayesian posterior probabilities (pp) were determined for planned efficacy and safety outcomes using intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02626299) and closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: = 492) were included in the primary analyses. The higher dose had a lower EPB rate [1.7% (9/540) vs 2.4% (12/492), pp=0.81] especially if participants had low DHA status at enrolment [2.0% (5/249) vs 4.1%, (9/219), pp=0.93]. Participants with high enrolment DHA status did not realize a dose effect [1000 mg: 1.4% (4/289); 200 mg: 1.1% (3/271), pp = 0.57]. The higher dose was associated with fewer serious adverse events (maternal: chorioamnionitis, premature rupture of membranes and pyelonephritis; neonatal: feeding, genitourinary and neurologic problems, all pp>0.90). INTERPRETATION: Clinicians could consider prescribing 1000 mg DHA daily during pregnancy to reduce EPB in women with low DHA status if they are able to screen for DHA. FUNDING: The National Institutes of Health Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) funded the study. Life's DHA™-S oil, DSM Nutritional Products LLC, Switzerland provided all capsules.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.269 · 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