Individualized Target Fortification of Breast Milk with Protein, Carbohydrates, and Fat for Preterm Infants: Effect on Neurodevelopment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Preterm infants are at high risk of extrauterine growth restriction and suboptimal neurological development due to cumulative nutrient deficits. Standard fortification (SF) of human milk does not account for individual macronutrient variability, potentially leading to inadequate intake. Target fortification (TFO) adjusts supplementation based on the measured macronutrient content, aimed at providing macronutrient intake aligned with ESPGHAN (European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition) recommendations and optimize growth and development. This study aims to evaluate the effects of TFO compared to SF on growth, body composition, and neurological outcomes at 18 months corrected age. Methods: In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, preterm infants (<30 weeks gestation) received either SF or TFO for at least three weeks. Macronutrient levels in breast milk were analyzed three times per week, with modular adjustments in the TFO group. Growth parameters, body composition at 36 weeks postmenstrual age, and Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development III (BSID-III) scores at 18 months corrected age were assessed (n = 69). Results: TFO significantly increased protein, fat, and carbohydrate intake compared to SF, leading to higher weight gain (2514 ± 289 g vs. 2283 ± 332 g, p < 0.01) and growth velocity (21.7 ± 2.3 g/kg/d vs. 19.2 ± 2.2 g/kg/d, p < 0.001). In infants whose mother’s milk had low protein levels, fat-free mass was significantly higher with TFO compared to SF. BSID-III scores were higher in the TFO group across cognitive, language, and motor domains, with significant improvements in expressive language scores in infants whose mother’s milk had high protein levels (p < 0.05). The number of preterm infants with a motor BSID-III score of ≤70 was significantly lower in the TFO group compared to the SF group (0 vs. 3, p < 0.05). Conclusions: TFO enhanced growth and body composition and may support better neurological outcomes in preterm infants. While most BSID-III differences were not statistically significant, the data suggest that TFO may reduce the risk of developmental delays. Larger, multicenter trials are needed to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".