ReviewNutrients2015
Guidelines for feeding very low birth weight infants.
Review in Nutrients, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 137 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
137 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 317 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nutritional Management of Low Birth Weight and Preterm Infants in Low- and Low Middle-Income Countries.Neonatology · 2025Pooled it
- Influencing factors for surgical treatment in neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Re-feeding versus discarding gastric residuals to improve growth in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Routine monitoring of gastric residual for prevention of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Three-hourly versus two-hourly feeding interval in stable preterm infants: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of pediatrics · 2022Pooled it
- Routine prefeed gastric aspiration in preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2021Pooled it
- High versus standard volume enteral feeds to promote growth in preterm or low birth weight infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Multi-nutrient fortification of human milk for preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Human milk-derived fortifier versus bovine milk-derived fortifier for prevention of mortality and morbidity in preterm neonates.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Re-feeding versus discarding gastric residuals to improve growth in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Influence of gastric residual assessment in preterm neonates on time to achieve enteral feeding (the GRASS trial)-Multi-centre, assessor-blinded randomised clinical trial.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Trial
- Source of human milk (mother or donor) is more important than fortifier type (human or bovine) in shaping the preterm infant microbiome.Cell reports. Medicine · 2022Trial
- Comparison of Time Taken for Feeding Stable Preterm Babies Between Regular Nurse Feeding and Feeding with Feed Rail-A Randomized, Controlled Study.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2022Trial
- The "Fortilat" Randomized Clinical Trial Follow-Up: Neurodevelopmental Outcome at 18 Months of Age.Nutrients · 2020Trial
- The "Fortilat" Randomized Clinical Trial Follow-Up: Auxological Outcome at 18 Months of Age.Nutrients · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Shorter Time to Full Preterm Feeding Using Intact Protein Formula: A Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Trial
- Three-hourly feeding intervals are associated with faster advancement in very preterm infants.Early human development · 2019Trial
- A Novel Donkey Milk-derived Human Milk Fortifier in Feeding Preterm Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2019Trial
- Sooner or later: does early human milk fortification improve outcomes?Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2018Trial
77 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the fact that feeding a very low birth weight (VLBW) neonate is a fundamental and inevitable part of its management, this is a field which is beset with controversies. Optimal nutrition improves growth and neurological outcomes, and reduces the incidence of sepsis and possibly even retinopathy of prematurity. There is a great deal of heterogeneity of practice among neonatologists and pediatricians regarding feeding VLBW infants. A working group on feeding guidelines for VLBW infants was constituted in McMaster University, Canada. The group listed a number of important questions that had to be answered with respect to feeding VLBW infants, systematically reviewed the literature, critically appraised the level of evidence, and generated a comprehensive set of guidelines. These guidelines form the basis of this state-of-art review. The review touches upon trophic feeding, nutritional feeding, fortification, feeding in special circumstances, assessment of feed tolerance, and management of gastric residuals, gastro-esophageal reflux, and glycerin enemas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.