Modifiers of the effect of maternal multiple micronutrient supplementation on stillbirth, birth outcomes, and infant mortality: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from 17 randomised trials in low-income and middle-income countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Background Micronutrient deficiencies are common among women in low-income and middle-income countries. Data from randomised trials suggest that maternal multiple micronutrient supplementation decreases the risk of low birthweight and potentially improves other infant health outcomes. However, heterogeneity across studies suggests influence from effect modifiers. We aimed to identify individual-level modifiers of the effect of multiple micronutrient supplements on stillbirth, birth outcomes, and infant mortality in low-income and middle-income countries. Methods This two-stage meta-analysis of individual patient included data from 17 randomised controlled trials done in 14 low-income and middle-income countries, which compared multiple micronutrient supplements containing iron-folic acid versus iron-folic acid alone in 112 953 pregnant women. We generated study-specific estimates and pooled subgroup estimates using fixed-effects models and assessed heterogeneity between subgroups with the χ2 test for heterogeneity. We did sensitivity analyses using random-effects models, stratifying by iron-folic acid dose, and exploring individual study effect. Findings Multiple micronutrient supplements containing iron-folic acid provided significantly greater reductions in neonatal mortality for female neonates compared with male neonates than did iron-folic acid supplementation alone (RR 0·85, 95% CI 0·75–0·96 vs 1·06, 0·95–1·17; p value for interaction 0·007). Multiple micronutrient supplements resulted in greater reductions in low birthweight (RR 0·81, 95% CI 0·74–0·89; p value for interaction 0·049), small-for-gestational-age births (0·92, 0·87–0·97; p=0·03), and 6-month mortality (0·71, 0·60–0·86; p=0·04) in anaemic pregnant women (haemoglobin <110g/L) as compared with non-anaemic pregnant women. Multiple micronutrient supplements also had a greater effect on preterm births among underweight pregnant women (BMI <18·5 kg/m2; RR 0·84, 95% CI 0·78–0·91; p=0·01). Initiation of multiple micronutrient supplements before 20 weeks gestation provided greater reductions in preterm birth (RR 0·89, 95% CI 0·85–0·93; p=0·03). Generally, the survival and birth outcome effects of multiple micronutrient supplementation were greater with high adherence (≥95%) to supplementation. Multiple micronutrient supplements did not significantly increase the risk of stillbirth or neonatal, 6-month, or infant mortality, neither overall or in any of the 26 examined subgroups. Interpretation Antenatal multiple micronutrient supplements improved survival for female neonates and provided greater birth-outcome benefits for infants born to undernourished and anaemic pregnant women. Early initiation in pregnancy and high adherence to multiple micronutrient supplements also provided greater overall benefits. Studies should now aim to elucidate the mechanisms accounting for differences in the effect of antenatal multiple micronutrient supplements on infant health by maternal nutrition status and sex. Funding None.
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 | 0.025 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.057 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".