MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211134082 · doi:10.1002/cl2.1141

Effects of neonatal nutrition interventions on neonatal mortality and child health and development outcomes: A systematic review

2021· review· en· W4211134082 on OpenAlexaff
Aamer Imdad, Faseeha Rehman, Evan W. Davis, Deepika Ranjit, Gamael Saint Surin, Suzanna Attia, Sarah Lawler, Abigail Smith, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Bibliographic record

VenueCampbell Systematic Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionNeonatal mortalityMedicineChild healthPediatricsIntensive care medicineInfant mortalityEnvironmental healthNursingPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The last two decades have seen a significant decrease in mortality for children <5 years of age in low and middle-income countries (LMICs); however, neonatal (age, 0–28 days) mortality has not decreased at the same rate. We assessed three neonatal nutritional interventions that have the potential of reducing morbidity and mortality during infancy in LMICs. Objectives To determine the efficacy and effectiveness of synthetic vitamin A, dextrose oral gel, and probiotic supplementation during the neonatal period. Search Methods We conducted electronic searches for relevant studies on the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, SCOPUS, and CENTRAL, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, up to November 27, 2019. Selection Criteria We aimed to include randomized and quasi-experimental studies. The target population was neonates in LMICs. The interventions included synthetic vitamin A supplementation, oral dextrose gel supplementation, and probiotic supplementation during the neonatal period. We included studies from the community and hospital settings irrespective of the gestational age or birth weight of the neonate. Data Collection and Analysis Two authors screened the titles and extracted the data from selected studies. The risk of bias (ROB) in the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were neonatal sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), prevention and treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia, adverse events, and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Data were meta-analyzed by random effect models to obtain relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. The overall rating of evidence was determined by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Main Results Sixteen randomized studies (total participants 169,366) assessed the effect of vitamin A supplementation during the neonatal period. All studies were conducted in low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries. Thirteen studies were conducted in the community setting and three studies were conducted in the hospital setting, specifically in neonatal intensive care units. Studies were conducted in 10 different countries including India (four studies), Guinea-Bissau (three studies), Bangladesh (two studies), and one study each in China, Ghana, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe. The overall ROB was low in most of the included studies for neonatal vitamin A supplementation. The pooled results from the community based randomized studies showed that there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality in the vitamin A (intervention) group compared to controls at 1 month (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90–1.08; six studies with 126,548 participants, statistical heterogeneity I 2 0%, funnel plot symmetrical, grade rating high), 6 months (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.89–1.07; 12 studies with 154,940 participants, statistical heterogeneity I 2 43%, funnel plot symmetrical, GRADE quality high) and 12 months of age (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.94–1.14; eight studies with 118,376 participants, statistical heterogeneity I 2 46%, funnel plot symmetrical, GRADE quality high). Neonatal vitamin A supplementation increased the incidence of bulging fontanelle by 53% compared to control (RR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12–2.09; six studies with 100,256 participants, statistical heterogeneity I 2 65%, funnel plot symmetrical, GRADE quality high). We did not identify any experimental study that addressed the use of dextrose gel for the prevention and/or treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia in LMIC. Thirty-three studies assessed the effect of probiotic supplementation during the neonatal period (total participants 11,595; probiotics: 5854 and controls: 5741). All of the included studies were conducted in LMIC and were randomized. Most of the studies were done in the hospital setting and included participants who were preterm (born < 37 weeks gestation) and/or low birth weight (<2500 g birth weight). Studies were conducted in 13 different countries with 10 studies conducted in India, six studies in Turkey, three studies each in China and Iran, two each in Mexico and South Africa, and one each in Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, and Thailand. Three studies were at high ROB due to lack of appropriate randomization sequence or allocation concealment. Combined data from 25 studies showed that probiotic supplementation reduced all-cause mortality by 20% compared to controls (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66–0.96; total number of participants 10,998, number needed to treat 100, statistical heterogeneity I 2 0%, funnel plot symmetrical, GRADE quality high). Twenty-nine studies reported the effect of probiotics on the incidence of NEC, and the combined results showed a relative reduction of 54% in the intervention group compared to controls (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35–0.59; total number of participants 5574, number needed to treat 17, statistical heterogeneity I 2 24%, funnel plot symmetrical, GRADE quality high). Twenty-one studies assessed the effect of probiotic supplementation during the neonatal period on neonatal sepsis, and the combined results showed a relative reduction of 22% in the intervention group compared to controls (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70–0.86; total number of participants 9105, number needed to treat 14, statistical heterogeneity I 2 23%, funnel plot symmetrical, GRADE quality high). Authors' Conclusions Vitamin A supplementation during the neonatal period does not reduce all-cause neonatal or infant mortality in LMICs in the community setting. However, neonatal vitamin A supplementation increases the risk of Bulging Fontanelle. No experimental or quasi-experimental studies were available from LMICs to assess the effect of dextrose gel supplementation for the prevention or treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia. Probiotic supplementation during the neonatal period seems to reduce all-cause mortality, NEC, and sepsis in babies born with low birth weight and/or preterm in the hospital setting. There was clinical heterogeneity in the use of probiotics, and we could not recommend any single strain of probiotics for wider use based on these results. There was a lack of studies on probiotic supplementation in the community setting. More research is needed to assess the effect of probiotics administered to neonates in-home/community setting in LMICs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.011
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCampbell Systematic ReviewsSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207