Effect of Maternal Docosahexaenoic Acid Supplementation on Very Preterm Infant Growth: Secondary Outcome of a Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to determine the effect of a maternal docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation during lactation, compared with a placebo, on the neonatal growth profile of breastfed very preterm infants. METHODS: Preterm infants' growth profile, growth velocity from birth to 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA), and growth at 36 weeks' PMA were pre-specified secondary outcomes of a randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted in 16 Canadian neonatal intensive care units (2015-2018). Lactating mothers who delivered before 29 weeks' gestation were given 1.2 g of DHA daily or a placebo within 72 h of delivery and up to 36 weeks' PMA. Analyses were performed using a linear regression model with generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: 461 mothers and their 528 infants (DHA, N = 273; placebo, N = 255) were included with mean gestational age of 26.5 weeks (standard deviation [SD] = 1.6); 275 (52.1%) were males; mean birth weight was 895 g (SD = 240). DHA interaction with sex was significant on weight profile (interaction p < 0.001), weight velocity (interaction p = 0.05), and weight at 36 weeks' PMA (interaction p = 0.02). Females in the DHA group gained more weight compared to the placebo group (mean difference [MD], 52.6 g [95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.5-80.8], p < 0.001). Weight velocity was significantly higher in females of the DHA group (MD, 3.4 g/kg/day [95% CI: 0.6-6.2], p = 0.02). At 36 weeks' PMA, the weight of males in the DHA group was significantly smaller (MD, -88.9 g [95% CI: -166.2 to -11.6], p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: DHA positively affected female infants' neonatal weight profile and velocity and negatively affected male infants' weight at 36 weeks' PMA.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".