Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33184497›Full record

ReviewPediatric research2021

Do preterm girls need different nutrition to preterm boys? Sex-specific nutrition for the preterm infant.

Anna C Tottman, Colleen J Oliver, Jane M Alsweiler, Barbara E Cormack

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Prevalence and associated factors of malnutrition among indigenous infants in Sepang and Kuala Langat: A cross-sectional study.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2026
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Estimation of the causal effect of sex on neonatal intensive care unit outcomes among very low birth weight infants.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna C TottmanLiggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. a.tottman@auckland.ac.nz.
Colleen J OliverNeonatal Services, Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jane M AlsweilerDepartment of Paediatrics: Child and Youth Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Barbara E CormackLiggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
University of Auckland · NZAuckland City Hospital · NZRoyal Women's Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Boys born preterm are recognised to be at higher risk of adverse outcomes than girls born preterm. Despite advances in neonatal intensive care and overall improvements in neonatal morbidity and mortality, boys born preterm continue to show worse short- and long-term outcomes than girls. Preterm birth presents a nutritional crisis during a critical developmental period, with postnatal undernutrition and growth-faltering common complications of neonatal intensive care. Furthermore, this preterm period corresponds to that of rapid in utero brain growth and development, and the developmental window relating to foetal programming of adult non-communicable diseases, the prevalence of which are associated both with preterm birth and sex. There is increasing evidence to show that from foetal life, boys and girls have different responses to maternal nutrition, that maternal breastmilk composition differs based on foetal sex and that early neonatal nutritional interventions affect boys and girls differently. This narrative review examines the evidence that sex is an important moderator of the outcomes of preterm nutrition intervention, and describes what further knowledge is required before providing nutrition intervention for infants born preterm based on their sex. IMPACT: This review examines the increasing evidence that boys and girls respond differently to nutritional stressors before birth, that maternal breastmilk composition differs by foetal sex and that nutritional interventions have different responses based on infant sex. Boys and girls born preterm are given standard nutritional support which does not take infant sex into account, and few studies of neonatal nutrition consider infant sex as a potential mediator of outcomes. By optimising early nutrition for boys and girls born preterm, we may improve outcomes for both sexes. We propose future studies of neonatal nutritional interventions should consider infant sex.

Indexed as

Child DevelopmentInfant Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaInfant, PrematureNutritional StatusPremature BirthAge FactorsBody CompositionBottle FeedingBreast FeedingEnergy MetabolismFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant FormulaInfant, NewbornMale

Identifiers

PMID33184497
OpenAlexW3098740543

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.