Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29527341›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2018

Does antenatal micronutrient supplementation improve children's cognitive function? Evidence from the follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial in Nepal.

Sophiya Dulal, Frédérique Liégeois, David Osrin, Adam Kuczynski, Dharma S Manandhar, Bhim P Shrestha, Aman Sen, Naomi Saville, Delan Devakumar, Audrey Prost

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sophiya DulalMother and Infant Research Activities (MIRA), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Frédérique LiégeoisInstitute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
David OsrinInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Adam KuczynskiDepartment of Clinical Neuropsychology, Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital, London, UK.
Dharma S ManandharMother and Infant Research Activities (MIRA), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bhim P ShresthaMother and Infant Research Activities (MIRA), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Aman SenMother and Infant Research Activities (MIRA), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Naomi SavilleInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Delan DevakumarInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Audrey ProstInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBMother and Infant Research Activities · NP

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMultiple Micronutrient (MMN) supplementation during pregnancy can decrease the proportion of infants born low birth weight and small for gestational age. Supplementation could also enhance children's cognitive function by improving access to key nutrients during fetal brain development and increasing birth weight, especially in areas where undernutrition is common. We tested the hypothesis that children whose mothers received MMN supplementation during pregnancy would have higher intelligence in early adolescence compared with those receiving Iron and Folic Acid (IFA) only.

methodsWe followed up children in Nepal, whose mothers took part in a double-blind Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) that compared the effects on birth weight and gestational duration of antenatal MMN versus IFA supplementation. We assessed children's Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) using the Universal Non-verbal Intelligence Test (UNIT), and their executive function using the counting Stroop test. The parent trial was registered as ISRCTN88625934.

resultsWe identified 813 (76%) of the 1069 children whose mothers took part in the parent trial. We found no differences in FSIQ at 12 years between MMN and IFA groups (absolute difference in means (diff): 1.25, 95% CI -0.57 to 3.06). Similarly, there were no differences in mean UNIT memory (diff: 1.41, 95% CI -0.48 to 3.30), reasoning (diff: 1.17, 95% CI -0.72 to 3.06), symbolic (diff: 0.97, 95% CI -0.67 to 2.60) or non-symbolic quotients (diff: 1.39, 95% CI -0.60 to 3.38).

conclusionOur follow-up of a double-blind RCT in Nepal found no evidence of benefit from antenatal MMN compared with IFA for children's overall intelligence and executive function at 12 years.

Indexed as

child healthclinical trialnutritionpublic health

Identifiers

PMID29527341
PMCPMC5841533
OpenAlexW2791119647

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.