Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29926476›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2018

Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants.

Maria Quigley, Nicholas D Embleton, William McGuire

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 153 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
153citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
49.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

153 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 721 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Breastfeeding and the Risk of Infant Illness in Asia: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Guideline
  16. Trial
  17. Bonding, Relaxation, Separation, and Connection: Expressing Human Milk While Videoconferencing with the Hospitalized Premature Infant.Breastfeeding medicine : the official journal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine · 2022
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Article
  20. Review

93 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Maria QuigleyNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Oxford, UK, 0X3 7LF.
Nicholas D Embleton
William McGuire
Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants.

objectivesTo determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants. SEARCH

methodsWe used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (until 8 June 2017), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) methods. MAIN

resultsEleven trials, in which 1809 infants participated in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and seven compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the four most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.06).The GRADE quality of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision). AUTHORS'

conclusionsIn preterm and LBW infants, feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.

Indexed as

Infant FormulaMilk, HumanChild DevelopmentEnteral NutritionFood, FortifiedHeadHumansInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaInfant, PrematureRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicWeight Gain

Identifiers

PMID29926476
PMCPMC6513381
OpenAlexW1480377400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.