ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2019
Design, development, and evaluation of the Maternal Outcomes and Nutrition Tool (MONT).
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Design, development, and evaluation of the Maternal Outcomes and Nutrition Tool (MONT).Maternal & child nutrition · 2019Article
- Essential Mineral Intake During Pregnancy and Its Association With Maternal Health and Birth Outcomes in South East Queensland, Australia.Nutrition and metabolic insights · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suboptimal nutrition has been largely associated with poorer perinatal outcomes. However, an inability to compare data between biologically and geographically diverse cohorts has complicated determination of the role of diet in such conditions. The aim of this paper is to describe the design, development, and evaluation of the Maternal Outcomes and Nutrition Tool (MONT), a novel cross-cultural digital dietary data collection tool. The tool was modelled on previously validated food frequency questionnaires and designed for exclusive administration in the digital environment, featuring minimal language and emphasis on images. Participants were recruited by both passive and active means. A total of 502 women were recruited; descriptive statistics were used to describe the cohort. Pregnant women constituted the majority of subjects recruited (n = 376, 74.9%), 63% of which were nulliparous. Women were recruited from 13 ethnicities and 20 countries of birth. Of the 341 women who commenced the surveys (68%), 114 submitted complete datasets (33.5%). Maintenance and recruitment costs equated to $5.64 per completion. Total processing and analysis time for the pilot dataset equated to 12 s per survey. The MONT was used successfully by women from a variety of continents and cultures and proved to be practical and economical in terms resource management.
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.