Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29767673›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2018

Modeling the impact of folic acid fortification and supplementation on red blood cell folate concentrations and predicted neural tube defect risk in the United States: have we reached optimal prevention?

Krista S Crider, Yan Ping Qi, Owen Devine, Sarah C Tinker, Robert J Berry

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Unmet needs in autoimmune liver diseases.Current opinion in immunology · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Krista S CriderCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, Atlanta, GA.
Yan Ping QiCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, Atlanta, GA.
Owen DevineCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, Atlanta, GA.
Sarah C TinkerCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, Atlanta, GA.
Robert J BerryCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Division of Congenital and Developmental Disorders, Atlanta, GA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The US CDC and the Institute of Medicine recommend that women capable of becoming pregnant consume ≥400 µg synthetic folic acid/d to prevent neural tube defects (NTDs). The United States has 3 sources of folic acid: fortified enriched cereal grain products (ECGPs), fortified ready-to-eat (RTE) cereals, and dietary supplements. Objective: Our objectives were as follows: 1) to estimate the usual daily folic acid intake and distributions of red blood cell (RBC) folate concentrations among women consuming folic acid from different sources; 2) to assess the usual daily total folic acid intake associated with optimal RBC folate concentrations for NTD prevention; 3) to predict NTD prevalence; and 4) to estimate the number of preventable folate-sensitive NTDs. Design: NHANES data (2007-2012) for nonpregnant women of reproductive age (12-49 y) were used to estimate usual daily intakes of synthetic folic acid and natural food folate. We applied existing models of the relation between RBC folate concentrations and NTD risk to predict NTD prevalence. Results: Based on the distribution of overall RBC folate concentrations (4783 women), the predicted NTD prevalence was 7.3/10,000 live births [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 5.5-9.4/10,000 live births]. Women consuming folic acid from ECGPs as their only source had lower usual daily total folic acid intakes (median: 115 µg/d; IQR: 79-156 µg/d), lower RBC folate concentrations (median: 881 nmol/L; IQR: 704-1108 nmol/L), and higher predicted NTD prevalence (8.5/10,000 live births; 95% UI: 6.4-10.8/10,000 live births) compared with women consuming additional folic acid from diet or supplements. If women who currently consume folic acid from ECGPs only (48% of women) consumed additional folic acid sources, 345 (95% UI: 0-821) to 701 (95% UI: 242-1189) additional NTDs/y could be prevented. Conclusions: This analysis supports current recommendations and does not indicate any need for higher intakes of folic acid to achieve optimal NTD prevention. Ensuring 400 µg/d intake of folic acid prior to pregnancy has the potential to increase the number of babies born without an NTD.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChildComputer SimulationErythrocytesFemaleFolic AcidFood AnalysisHumansMiddle AgedModels, BiologicalNeural Tube DefectsNutrition SurveysPregnancyPrenatal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaRisk FactorsFolic Acid

Identifiers

PMID29767673
PMCPMC6980262
OpenAlexW2804797688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.