MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412628797 · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2025.107510

Enteral High-Dose Docosahexaenoic Acid and Neurodevelopment in Extremely Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4412628797 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Shepherd, Naho Ikeda, Thomas Sullivan, M Guillot, Andrew J McPhee, Robert A. Gibson, Maria Makrides, Jacqueline F. Gould

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research Council
KeywordsMeta-analysisEnteral administrationDocosahexaenoic acidMedicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicineParenteral nutritionPolyunsaturated fatty acidFatty acidChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h2>Abstract</h2><h3>Background</h3> Enteral high-dose docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) may be required for neurodevelopment, including cognition, of extremely preterm infants. High-level summative evidence is lacking. <h3>Objective</h3> To examine associations between enteral high-dose DHA during the neonatal period and neurodevelopment in infants born ≤ 29 weeks' gestation. <h3>Methods</h3> CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science were searched (inceptions to 4/11/2024). Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in infants born ≤ 29 weeks, assessing direct enteral administration ≥ 40 mg/kg/day DHA, or breast milk/formula with DHA ≥ 0.60% total fatty acids, reporting neurodevelopmental outcomes. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data and assessed quality using Cochrane Handbook guidance. Data were pooled using fixed or random-effect meta-analyses. Primary outcome was global cognitive scores from a standardised test. <h3>Results</h3> We screened 1978 articles and included 3 high-quality RCTs (2028 infants born ≤ 29 weeks). Enteral high-dose DHA was not associated with overall differences in global cognition scores at 18-36 months' corrected age (CA) (3 RCTs, 638 children, MD 0.67, 95% CI -1.80, 3.15; P=0.59; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) or 5-7 years' CA (2 RCTs, 852 children, MD 2.22, 95% CI -0.14, 4.57; P=0.06; I<sup>2</sup> = 33%); however, benefit was observed in the largest RCT with a direct enteral emulsion (656 children, 5 years' CA, MD 3.45, 95% CI 0.38, 6.52; P=0.03). Associations with most secondary outcomes were not seen; however high-dose DHA was associated with reduced mild motor (3 RCTs, 18-36 months' CA) and cognitive (2 RCTs, 5-7 years' CA) impairment. No negative impacts were observed. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Enteral high-dose DHA in extremely preterm infants was not associated with differences in global cognition scores on meta-analysis; however, higher scores were observed with use of a direct emulsion. Results support contemporary recommendations. <h3>Registration</h3> PROSPERO, CRD42022382744, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022382744

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)0.001
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 score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicFatty Acid Research and HealthFrench-language works237,207