Observational studyArchives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition2022
Early versus later initiation of parenteral nutrition for very preterm infants: a propensity score-matched observational study.
Observational study in Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Timing of Parenteral Nutrition in Neonates, Infants, and Children: Current Evidence, Circadian Considerations, and Emerging Directions.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Review
- AI-guided precision parenteral nutrition for neonatal intensive care units.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Use of parenteral nutrition in the first postnatal week in England and Wales: an observational study using real-world data.BMJ paediatrics open · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of timing of initiation of parenteral nutrition (PN) after birth in very preterm infants.
designPropensity-matched analysis of data from the UK National Neonatal Research Database. PATIENTS: 65 033 babies <31 weeks gestation admitted to neonatal units in England and Wales between 2008 and 2019.
interventionsPN initiated in the first 2 days (early) versus after the second postnatal day (late). Babies who died in the first 2 days without receiving PN were analysed as 'late'.
main outcome measuresThe main outcome measure was morbidity-free survival to discharge. The secondary outcomes were survival to discharge, growth and other core neonatal outcomes.
findingsNo difference was found in the primary outcome (absolute rate difference (ARD) between early and late 0.50%, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.45, p=0.29). The early group had higher rates of survival to discharge (ARD 3.3%, 95% CI 2.7 to 3.8, p<0.001), late-onset sepsis (ARD 0.84%, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.2, p<0.001), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (ARD 1.24%, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.17, p=0.01), treated retinopathy of prematurity (ARD 0.50%, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.84, p<0.001), surgical procedures (ARD 0.80%, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.40, p=0.01) and greater drop in weight z-score between birth and discharge (absolute difference 0.019, 95% CI 0.003 to 0.035, p=0.02). Of 4.9% of babies who died in the first 2 days, 3.4% were in the late group and not exposed to PN.
conclusionsResidual confounding and survival bias cannot be excluded and justify the need for a randomised controlled trial powered to detect differences in important functional 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.