Trial reportEarly human development2019
Three-hourly feeding intervals are associated with faster advancement in very preterm infants.
Trial report in Early human development, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three-hourly versus two-hourly feeding interval in stable preterm infants: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of pediatrics · 2022Pooled it
- Short versus long feeding interval for bolus feedings in very preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Unplanned natural experiment: probiotics prevent necrotizing enterocolitis, a single center quality improvement report.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Implementing a three-hourly feeding schedule in stable preterm infants to decrease maternal fatigue.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effect of two-hourly (Q2H) vs. three-hourly (Q3H) feeding on time to achieve full enteral feeding, growth metrics and respiratory tolerance in very preterm infants with birth weight ≤ 1250 g. STUDY
designRetrospective study review of 18 months before and after a change in our feeding guideline from Q3H to Q2H feedings.
results113 infants were included, 59 in Q3H and 54 in Q2H groups. Q2H infants required 10% more days to achieve full enteral feeding, however it was not statistically significant (P = 0.054). Q2H feeding was associated with 16% more central catheter days (P = 0.02) and 17% more parenteral nutrition days (P = 0.019). There were no differences in respiratory outcomes or growth metrics between the groups.
conclusionVery preterm infants fed Q3H had less central catheter and parenteral nutrition days when compared to those fed Q2H, without significant differences in growth or respiratory outcomes.
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.