MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376132304 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071359

Prenatal iodine supplementation and early childhood neurodevelopment: the PoppiE trial – study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

2023· article· en· W4376132304 on OpenAlexaff
Karen P Best, Jacqueline F. Gould, Maria Makrides, Thomas Sullivan, Jeanie L.Y. Cheong, Shao J. Zhou, Stefan C. Kane, Huda Safa, Andrew Sparks, Lex W. Doyle, Andrew J McPhee, Tanya Nippita, Hossein Haji Ali Afzali, Rosalie M Grivell, Dorothy Mackerras, Elaine Knight, Simon Wood, Tim Green

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWomen's and Children's Hospital FoundationChildren's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPediatricsBayley Scales of Infant DevelopmentObservational studyClinical trialPregnancyChild developmentCognitionPsychiatryPsychomotor learningInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Observational studies suggest both low and high iodine intakes in pregnancy are associated with poorer neurodevelopmental outcomes in children. This raises concern that current universal iodine supplement recommendations for pregnant women in populations considered to be iodine sufficient may negatively impact child neurodevelopment. We aim to determine the effect of reducing iodine intake from supplements for women who have adequate iodine intake from food on the cognitive development of children at 24 months of age. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, randomised, controlled, clinician, researcher and participant blinded trial with two parallel groups. Using a hybrid decentralised clinical trial model, 754 women (377 per group) less than 13 weeks' gestation with an iodine intake of ≥165 µg/day from food will be randomised to receive either a low iodine (20 µg/day) multivitamin and mineral supplement or an identical supplement containing 200) µg/day (amount commonly used in prenatal supplements in Australia), from enrolment until delivery. The primary outcome is the developmental quotient of infants at 24 months of age assessed with the Cognitive Scale of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, fourth edition. Secondary outcomes include infant language and motor development; behavioural and emotional development; maternal and infant clinical outcomes and health service utilisation of children. Cognitive scores will be compared between groups using linear regression, with adjustment for location of enrolment and the treatment effect described as a mean difference with 95% CI. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted from the Women's and Children's Health Network Research Ethics Committee (HREC/17/WCHN/187). The results of this trial will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04586348.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.014

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicThyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207