MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281690245 · doi:10.1097/mpg.0000000000003490

Effects of a Novel High‐Quality Protein Infant Formula on Energetic Efficiency and Tolerance

2022· article· en· W4281690245 on OpenAlexaff
Devon Kuehn, Steven H. Zeisel, Diana F. Orenstein, J. Bruce German, Catherine J. Field, Shiva Teerdhala, Andrea Knežević, Sujata Patil, Sharon M. Donovan, Bo Lönnerdal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer InstituteWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineInfant formulaConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialAnthropometryPlaceboPediatricsAdverse effectInternal medicineHydrolyzed proteinProtein qualityGastroenterologyAnimal scienceBiochemistryHydrolysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Protein overfeeding in infants can have negative effects, such as diabetes and childhood obesity; key to reducing protein intake from formula is improving protein quality. The impact of a new infant formula [study formula (SF)] containing alpha-lactalbumin, lactoferrin, partially hydrolyzed whey, and whole milk on growth and tolerance compared to a commercial formula (CF) and a human milk reference arm was evaluated. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind trial included healthy, singleton, term infants, enrollment age ≤14 days. Primary outcome was mean daily weight gain. Secondary outcomes were anthropometrics, formula intake, serum amino acids, adverse events, gastrointestinal characteristics, and general disposition. RESULTS: Non-inferiority was demonstrated. There were no differences between the formula groups for z scores over time. Formula intake [-0.33 oz/kg/day, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.66 to -0.01, P = 0.05] and mean protein intake (-0.13 g/kg/day, 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.00, P = 0.05) were lower in the SF infants, with higher serum essential amino acid concentrations (including tryptophan) compared to the CF infants. Energetic efficiency was 14.0% (95% CI: 8.3%, 19.7%), 13.0% (95% CI: 6.0%, 20.0%), and 18.1% (95% CI: 9.4%, 26.8%) higher for weight, length, and head circumference, respectively, in SF infants compared to the CF infants. SF infants had significantly fewer spit-ups and softer stool consistency than CF infants. CONCLUSIONS: The SF resulted in improved parent-reported gastrointestinal tolerance and more efficient growth with less daily formula and protein intake supporting that this novel formula may potentially reduce the metabolic burden of protein overfeeding associated with infant formula.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and NutritionSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207