Oral Vitamin A, E and D Supplementation of Pre‐Term Newborns either Breast‐Fed or Formula‐Fed: a 3‐Month Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: In contrast to the studies of vitamin A and E status in children, adolescents and adults, information on preterm infants is scarce. In the present investigation we examined the vitamin A, D and E status of pre‐term infants at birth, and verified whether, at 1 and 3 months, breast or formula feeding affected the plasma concentration of those vitamins while being supplemented with Uvesterol ADEC. Patients and Methods: In this prospective study, 2 groups of consecutively recruited preterm newborns fed either breast milk or formula received 3000 IU of vitamin A, 5 IU of vitamin E and 1000 IU of vitamin D daily. Vitamin A and E were measured by high performance liquid chromatography and spectrophotometry. 25‐hydroxyvitamin D, a surrogate marker for vitamin D status, was measured by radioimmunoassay, and retinol binding‐protein concentration was measured by immunonephelometry. Results: At birth, formula‐fed and breast‐milk fed infants had similar plasma concentrations of vitamin A (0.75 ± 0.20 and 0.64 ± 0.21 m mol/L, ns), 25‐hydroxyvitamin D (34.4 ± 25.6 and 47.5 ± 26.7 nmol/L, ns) and vitamin E (9.5 ± 3.2 and 8.4 ± 3.3 μmol/L, ns). Vitamins A and E, and retinol binding‐protein concentrations steadily increased with time in both groups of infants without attaining, at 3 months, values considered normal in term infants and in young children. At 3 months of age, concentrations of 25‐hydroxyvitamin D reached values comparable to those observed in term infants. Conclusion: Plasma concentrations of vitamins A and E and of retinol binding‐protein steadily increased during the the study without reaching full repletion values. At the conclusion of the study, the type of nutrition did not affect plasma vitamin concentrations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".