Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26833080›Full record

ArticleTrials2016

Perspectives on the design and methodology of periconceptional nutrient supplementation trials.

Bernard J Brabin, Sabine Gies, Stephen Owens, Yves Claeys, Umberto D'Alessandro, Halidou Tinto, Loretta Brabin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Bernard J BrabinClinical Division, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L35QA, UK. b.j.brabin@liverpool.ac.uk.
Sabine GiesDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium. s.gies@itg.be.
Stephen OwensNorthumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, North Shields, NE29 8NH, UK. sowens@3mac.com.
Yves ClaeysClinical Sciences Department, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium. yclaeys@itg.be.
Umberto D'AlessandroMedical Research Council Unit (MRC), Fajara, The Gambia. udalessandro@mrc.gm.
Halidou TintoClinical Research Unit of Nanoro (URCN/IRSS), Nanoro, Burkina Faso. tintohalidou@yahoo.fr.
Loretta BrabinInstitute of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. loretta.Brabin@manchester.ac.uk.
Instituut voor Tropische Geneeskunde · BECancer Research UK Manchester Institute · GBInstitut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé · BFLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBNorthumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Long-term WIFS and malaria risk in early pregnancy: a randomized controlled trialU01HD061234 · NICHD · TMLIVERPOOL SCHOOL OF TROPICAL MEDICINE · PI BRABIN, BERNARD JOHN · 2009 to 2014
$1.9M
NICHD NIH HHS NIH-1U01HD061234-01A1NICHD NIH HHS U01 HD061234
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Periconceptional supplementation could extend the period over which maternal and fetal nutrition is improved, but there are many challenges facing early-life intervention studies. Periconceptional trials differ from pregnancy supplementation trials, not only because of the very early or pre-gestational timing of nutrient exposure but also because they generate subsidiary information on participants who remain non-pregnant. The methodological challenges are more complex although, if well designed, they provide opportunities to evaluate concurrent hypotheses related to the health of non-pregnant women, especially nulliparous adolescents. This review examines the framework of published and ongoing randomised trial designs. Four cohorts typically arise from the periconceptional trial design--two of which are non-pregnant and two are pregnant--and this structure provides assessment options related to pre-pregnant, maternal, pregnancy and fetal outcomes. Conceptually the initial decision for single or micronutrient intervention is central--as is the choice of dosage and content--in order to establish a comparative framework across trials, improve standardisation, and facilitate interpretation of mechanistic hypotheses. Other trial features considered in the review include: measurement options for baseline and outcome assessments; adherence to long-term supplementation; sample size considerations in relation to duration of nutrient supplementation; cohort size for non-pregnant and pregnant cohorts as the latter is influenced by parity selection; integrating qualitative studies and data management issues. Emphasis is given to low resource settings where high infection rates and the possibility of nutrient-infection interactions may require appropriate safety monitoring. The focus is on pragmatic issues that may help investigators planning a periconceptional trial.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsPrenatal CareResearch DesignFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMicronutrientsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicMicronutrients

Identifiers

PMID26833080
PMCPMC4736099
OpenAlexW2262855078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.