Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34857640›Full record

Observational studyArchives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition2022

Effect of prophylactic dextrose gel on the neonatal gut microbiome.

Sophie L St Clair, Jane E Harding, Justin M O'Sullivan, Gregory D Gamble, Jane M Alsweiler, Tommi Vatanen, hPOD Study Group

Open access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Oral dextrose gel to prevent hypoglycaemia in at-risk neonates.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sophie L St ClairLiggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7747-9978
Jane E HardingLiggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand j.harding@auckland.ac.nz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2697-1422
Justin M O'SullivanLiggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Gregory D GambleLiggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Jane M AlsweilerDepartment of Paediatrics: Child and Youth Health, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0874-6654
Tommi VatanenLiggins Institute, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
hPOD Study Group
University of Auckland · NZBroad Institute · US

Funding

"Two year outcomes after dextrose gel prophylaxis for neonatal hypoglycaemia"R01HD091075 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND · PI HARDING, JANE · 2018 to 2022
$2.0M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD091075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the effect of prophylactic dextrose gel on the infant gut microbiome.

designObservational cohort study nested in a randomised trial.

settingThree maternity hospitals in New Zealand. PATIENTS: Infants at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia whose parents consented to participation in the hypoglycaemia Prevention in newborns with Oral Dextrose trial (hPOD). Infants were randomised to receive prophylactic dextrose gel or placebo gel, or were not randomised and received no gel (controls). Stool samples were collected on days 1, 7 and 28.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was microbiome beta-diversity at 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes were beta-diversity, alpha-diversity, bacterial DNA concentration, microbial community stability and relative abundance of individual bacterial taxa at each time point.

resultsWe analysed 434 stool samples from 165 infants using 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. There were no differences between groups in beta-diversity at 4 weeks (p=0.49). There were also no differences between groups in any other microbiome measures including beta-diversity (p=0.53 at day 7), alpha-diversity (p=0.46 for day 7 and week 4), bacterial DNA concentration (p=0.91), microbial community stability (p=0.52) and microbial relative abundance at genus level. There was no evidence that exposure to any dextrose gel (prophylaxis or treatment) had any effect on the microbiome. Mode of birth, type of milk fed, hospital of birth and ethnicity were all associated with differences in the neonatal microbiome.

conclusionsClinicians and consumers can be reassured that dextrose gel used for prophylaxis or treatment of neonatal hypoglycaemia does not alter the neonatal gut microbiome. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 12614001263684.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeHypoglycemiaDNA, BacterialFecesFemaleGlucoseHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancyRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNA, BacterialGlucoseRNA, Ribosomal, 16Sinfant developmentintensive care unitsmicrobiologyneonatalneonatology

Identifiers

PMID34857640
PMCPMC9160211
OpenAlexW3215730380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.