Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11687034›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2001

Formula milk versus preterm human milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.

W McGuire, M Y Anthony

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04478487 (TITLE OF STUDY), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04478487 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

TITLE OF STUDY: Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Human Milk-based Human Milk Fortifier in Very Low Birth Weight Infants

TypeinterventionalSponsorNorthwest HealthRan2019 to 2024Enrolled40ConditionsInfant, Premature, DiseasesArmsMedolac human milk based human milk fortifier (MHMHMF)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

W McGuireTayside Institute of Child Health, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK, DD1 9SY. w.mcguire@dundee.ac.uk
M Y Anthony
Ninewells Hospital · GBJohn Radcliffe Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreterm human breast milk, compared with artificial formula milk, may provide insufficient nutrition for preterm or low birth weight infants. However, human milk may confer advantages in terms of a decreased incidence of gastrointestinal and neurodevelopmental adverse outcomes.

objectivesTo determine if formula milk compared with preterm human milk leads to improved growth and development without significant adverse effects in preterm or low birth weight infants. SEARCH STRATEGY: The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. This included electronic searches of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE and previous reviews including cross references. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing feeding with formula milk versus preterm human milk in preterm or low birth weight infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by each author and synthesis of data using relative risk and mean difference. MAIN

resultsOnly one small trial fulfilled the pre-specified inclusion criteria (Gross 1983). In preterm and low birth weight infants, enteral feeding with protein-enriched standard calorie formula milk compared with unfortified donated preterm human milk resulted in a greater rate of short term weight gain, but not of increase in length or head circumference. In the group randomised to receive formula milk, there was an increase in the risk of feed intolerance of borderline statistical significance, but no evidence of an effect on necrotising enterocolitis. There are no data on long term growth parameters or on neurodevelopmental outcomes. There are no randomised comparisons of feeding with the preterm milk of the infant's mother versus formula milk. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThere are very limited data from randomised trials of feeding preterm or low birth weight infants with formula milk compared with preterm human milk. This may relate to a perceived difficulty of allocating an alternative enteral feed to an infant in cases where the infant's mother wishes to feed with expressed breast milk.

Indexed as

Enteral NutritionInfant FoodInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, PrematureMilk, HumanGrowthHumansInfant, Newborn

Identifiers

PMID11687034
OpenAlexW4238473750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.