Trial reportJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2018
Randomized trial of earlier versus later oral feeding in very premature infants.
Trial report in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eligible Infants Included in Neonatal Clinical Trials and Reasons for Noninclusion: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Race and Ethnicity of Infants Enrolled in Neonatal Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Eligibility Criteria and Representativeness of Randomized Clinical Trials That Include Infants Born Extremely Premature: A Systematic Review.The Journal of pediatrics · 2021Pooled it
- Non-Pharmacological and Non-Surgical Feeding Interventions for Hospitalized Infants with Pediatric Feeding Disorder: A Scoping Review.Dysphagia · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo ascertain if earlier oral feeding initiation results in earlier attainment of full oral feedings/hospital discharge in very premature infants. STUDY
designEligible infants born at <29 weeks' gestation were randomized at 30 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA) to initiate oral feedings at 30 weeks' PMA (Earlier Oral Feeding Group) versus 33 weeks' PMA (Later Oral Feeding Group).
resultsThirty-four infants were randomized to the Earlier Oral Feeding Group and 32 to the Later Oral Feeding Group. There were no significant differences in our primary outcomes of PMA at full oral feedings (mean difference -0.5 weeks, 95% CI: -2.2 to +1.2 weeks) or hospital discharge (mean difference -0.2 weeks, 95% CI: -1.8 to +1.4 weeks).
conclusionsInitiating oral feeding attempts in very premature infants at 30 weeks' PMA does not result in earlier attainment of full oral feedings or discharge but is safe for infants who are not severely tachypneic or receiving positive pressure.
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.