ArticleBMJ open2020
Infant formula composition and educational performance: a protocol to extend follow-up for a set of randomised controlled trials using linked administrative education records.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Effect of nutritionally modified infant formula on academic performance: linkage of seven dormant randomised controlled trials to national education data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Article
- Clinical data for paediatric research: the Swiss approach : Proceedings of the National Symposium in Bern, Switzerland, Dec 5-6, 2019.BMC proceedings · 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 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe effect of infant nutrition on long-term cognition is important for parents and policy makers. However, most clinical trials typically have short follow-up periods, when measures of cognition are poorly predictive of later function. The few trials with longer-term follow-up have high levels of attrition, which can lead to selection bias, and in turn to erroneous interpretation of long-term harms and benefits of infant nutrition. We address the need for unbiased, long-term follow-up, by linking measures of educational performance from administrative education records. Educational performance is a meaningful marker of cognitive function in children and it is strongly correlated with IQ. We aim to evaluate educational performance for children who, as infants, were part of a series of trials that randomised participants to either nutritionally modified infant formula or standard formula. Most trialists anticipated positive effects of these interventions on later cognitive function. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using data from 1923 participants of seven randomised infant formula trials linked to the English National Pupil Database (NPD), this study will provide new insights into the effect of nutrient intake in infancy on school achievement. Our primary outcome will be the mean differences in z-scores between intervention and control groups for a compulsory Mathematics exam sat at age 16. Secondary outcomes will be z-scores for a compulsory English exam at age 16 and z-scores for compulsory Mathematics and English exams at age 11. We will also evaluate intervention effects on the likelihood of receiving special educational needs (SEN) support. All analyses will be performed separately by trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval, and approval from the Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group, has been obtained for this study. The results of this study will be disseminated to scientific, practitioner, and lay audiences, submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, and will contribute towards a PhD dissertation.
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.