ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2020
A comparison of macronutrient-based methods for deriving energy values in human milk.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Human Milk Macronutrients and Child Growth and Body Composition in the First Two Years: A Systematic Review.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024Pooled it
- Point-of-care human milk concentration by passive osmosis: comprehensive analysis of fresh human milk samples.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Article
- Deciphering macronutrient information about human milk.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Review
- The Influence of Oligosaccharides when Measuring Lactose and Total Carbohydrates in Human Milk and Comparison of Methods.The Journal of nutrition · 2023Article
- Protein Enrichment of Donor Breast Milk and Impact on Growth in Very Low Birth Weight Infants.Nutrients · 2021Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEnergy values for human milk are increasingly available clinically, though there are no standards for deriving these values. We compared published calorie methods using a common set of samples. STUDY
designTen human milk samples were measured for gross and digestible macronutrients using laboratory methods. Four calorie conversion factors were used: Atwater general (ATW-GEN); Atwater milk specific (ATW-MILK), human milk specific (HUM-MILK), and combustible conversions (COMBUST). Differences in derived calories were assessed using ANOVA.
resultsThere was a significant difference (P < 0.001) in calorie values between methods. Gross macronutrients with COMBUST conversion factors produced the highest calorie values (19.4 ± 1.4 kcal/ounce) whereas digestible macronutrients with HUM-MILK conversion factors produced the lowest calorie values (16.3 ± 1.3 kcal/ounce). Mean difference between these values was 3.1 kcal/ounce (95% CI 2.5, 3.7).
conclusionMean calorie difference of 3.1 kcal/ounce is clinically important for preterm infants, suggesting the need for standardization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32665689What 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.