Maternal serum unmetabolized folic acid concentration following multivitamin and mineral supplementation with or without folic acid after 12 weeks gestation: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregnant women are advised to take folic acid (FA) supplements before conception and during the first trimester of pregnancy. Many women continue FA supplementation throughout pregnancy, and concerns have been raised about associations between excessive FA intake and adverse maternal and child health outcomes. Unmetabolized folic acid (UMFA) is found in serum after high FA intakes and is proposed as a biomarker for excessive FA intake. We aimed to determine if removing FA from prenatal micronutrient supplements after 12 weeks of pregnancy reduces serum UMFA concentrations at 36 weeks gestation. In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial conducted in South Australia, 103 women with a singleton pregnancy were randomly assigned at 12-16 weeks gestation to take a micronutrient supplement containing no FA or 800 µg/day FA from enrollment until 36 weeks gestation. Ninety women (0 µg/day FA n = 46; 800 µg/day FA n = 44) completed the study. Mean, UMFA concentration was lower in the women randomized to the 0 µg/day group compared to the 800 µg/day FA group, 0.6 ± 0.7 and 1.4 ± 2.7 nmol/L, respectively. The adjusted mean difference (95% CI) in UMFA between the groups was [-0.85 (-1.62, -0.08) nmol/L, p = 0.03]. Maternal serum and red blood cell folate concentrations were lower in the 0 µg/day FA group than in the 800 µg/day group (median 23.2 vs. 49.3 and 1335 vs. 1914 nmol/L, respectively; p < 0.001). Removing FA at 12-16 weeks gestation from prenatal micronutrient supplements reduced the concentration of UMFA at 36 weeks gestation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".