MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411803966 · doi:10.3390/medicina61071195

Calcium Supplementation in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies

2025· review· en· W4411803966 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Angeliki Gerede, Panayiota Papasozomenou, Sofoklis Stavros, Anastasios Potiris, Ekaterini Domali, Nikolaos Nikolettos, Makarios Eleftheriades, Μenelaos Zafrakas

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyPreeclampsiaGestational hypertensionObstetricsCalcium supplementationInclusion and exclusion criteriaClinical trialGestationBirth weightGestational ageCalciumPediatricsInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: Calcium is an essential mineral that plays a vital role in fetal development and maternal health during pregnancy. The World Health Organization recommends a daily calcium intake of 1.5–2 g for pregnant adult women. Calcium deficiency during gestation may lead to complications, such as gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, loss of bone mineral density, impaired fetal development, and other adverse pregnancy outcomes. The aim of the present review is to evaluate the current clinical evidence on calcium intake during pregnancy. Methods: The present systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 statement by searching two major databases, PubMed and Mendeley. The study protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework (DOI: osf.io/rvj7z). Inclusion criteria were clinical trials on calcium supplementation during pregnancy. Exclusion criteria were clinical guidelines, reviews, case reports, case series, letters, and commentaries. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Results: Initially, 451 publications were identified, and after removal of duplicates and screening of titles and/or abstracts and/or full texts, 34 studies were included. The number of participants ranged between 30 and 22,000 women. Calcium supplementation was associated with lower incidence of and less severe gestational hypertension and preeclampsia, lower risk of preterm birth, longer pregnancy duration and higher neonatal birth weight, and improved maternal bone mineral density postpartum. When the doses were split up into smaller doses, the benefits were strongest with high-dose regimens (1.5–2 g/day). Conclusions: Calcium supplementation during pregnancy has beneficial effects on maternal and neonatal health, especially in populations with insufficient dietary daily calcium intake and women at high risk of hypertensive disorders. Daily dose may vary according to individual needs, daily dietary calcium intake, and general health status. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are necessary 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinaSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207