Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22972038›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Antenatal dietary advice and supplementation to increase energy and protein intake.

Erika Ota, Ruoyan Tobe-Gai, Rintaro Mori, Diane Farrar

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 6 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Erika OtaDepartment of GlobalHealth Policy, Graduate School ofMedicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. e-i@umin.ac.jp.
Ruoyan Tobe-Gai
Rintaro Mori
Diane Farrar
National Center For Child Health and Development · JPShandong University · CNThe University of Tokyo · JPUniversity of Bradford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGestational weight gain is positively associated with fetal growth, and observational studies of food supplementation in pregnancy have reported increases in gestational weight gain and fetal growth.

objectivesTo assess the effects of advice during pregnancy to increase energy and protein intake, or of actual energy and protein supplementation, on energy and protein intakes, and the effect on maternal and infant health outcomes. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (22 July 2011) and contacted researchers in the field. We updated the search on 12 July 2012 and added the results to the awaiting classification section of the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of dietary advice to increase energy and protein intake, or of actual energy and protein supplementation, during pregnancy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed risk of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data and checked for accuracy. Extracted data were supplemented by additional information from the trialists we contacted. MAIN

resultsWe examined 110 reports corresponding to 46 trials. Of these trials, 15 were included, 30 were excluded, and one is ongoing. Overall, 15 trials involving 7410 women were included.Nutritional advice (four trials, 790 women)Women given nutritional advice had a lower relative risk of having a preterm birth (two trials, 449 women) (risk ratio (RR) 0.46, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.98 ), head circumference at birth was increased in one trial (389 women) (mean difference (MD) 0.99 cm, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.55) and protein intake increased (three trials, 632 women) (protein intake: MD +6.99 g/day, 95% CI 3.02 to 10.97). No significant differences were observed on any other outcomes.Balanced energy and protein supplementation (11 trials, 5385 women)Risk of stillbirth was significantly reduced for women given balanced energy and protein supplementation (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.98, five trials, 3408 women), mean birthweight was significantly increased (random-effects MD +40.96 g, 95% CI 4.66 to 77.26 , Tau(2)= 1744, I(2) = 44%, 11 trials, 5385 women). There was also a significant reduction in the risk of small-for-gestational age (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.90, I(2) = 16%, seven trials, 4408 women). No significant effect was detected for preterm birth or neonatal death.High-protein supplementation (one trial, 1051 women)High-protein supplementation (one trial, 505 women), was associated with a significantly increased risk of small-for-gestational age babies (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.41).Isocaloric protein supplementation (two trials, 184 women)Isocaloric protein supplementation (two trials,184 women) had no significant effect on birthweight and weekly gestational weight gain. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis review provides encouraging evidence that antenatal nutritional advice with the aim of increasing energy and protein intake in the general obstetric population appears to be effective in reducing the risk of preterm birth, increasing head circumference at birth and increasing protein intake, there was no evidence of benefit or adverse effect for any other outcome reported.Balanced energy and protein supplementation seems to improve fetal growth, and may reduce the risk of stillbirth and infants born small-for-gestational age. High-protein supplementation does not seem to be beneficial and may be harmful to the fetus. Balanced-protein supplementation alone had no significant effects on perinatal outcomes.The results of this review should be interpreted with caution, the risk of bias was either unclear or high for at least one category examined in several of the included trials and the quality of the evidence was low for several important outcomes. Also the anthropometric characteristics of the general obstetric population is changing, therefore, those developing interventions aimed at altering energy and protein intake should ensure that only those women likely to benefit are included. Large, well designed randomised trials are needed to assess the effects of increasing energy and protein intake during pregnancy in women whose intake is below recommended levels.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeDietDietary ProteinsDietary SupplementsFemaleFetal DevelopmentHumansPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePremature BirthPrenatal CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStillbirthWeight GainDietary Proteins

Identifiers

PMID22972038
OpenAlexW4211029788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.