Trial reportNutritional neuroscience2023
Iron supplementation given to nonanemic infants: neurocognitive functioning at 16 years.
Trial report in Nutritional neuroscience, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Iron Supplementation and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Infancy and Early Childhood: A Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Cross-Sectional Study on Protein Substitutes for Paediatric Phenylketonuria Diet: Time to Pay Attention.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for iron.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Oral iron therapy: Current concepts and future prospects for improving efficacy and outcomes.British journal of haematology · 2024Review
- Micronutrients in infants suffering from cow's milk allergy fed with dietary formulas and breast milk.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThere is concern that high iron uptake during the critical period of early brain development carries potential risks, especially for nonanemic infants. This study examined the neurocognitive functioning of 16-year-olds who were nonanemic as infants and received iron supplementation.
methodsWe studied 562 Chilean adolescents (
resultsCompared to adolescents in the no-added iron condition in infancy, those in the iron-supplemented condition had poorer visual-motor integration, quantitative reasoning skills, and incurred more errors on neurocognitive tasks. Consuming larger amounts of iron-fortified formula in infancy was associated with lower arithmetic achievement. Of adolescents who had high hemoglobin at 6 months (Hb ≥ 125 g/L), those in the iron supplemented condition had poorer performance on arithmetic, quantitative reasoning, and response inhibition tests than those in the no-added iron condition. Of adolescents who had marginally low 6-month hemoglobin (Hb > 100 and < 110 g/L), those who received no-added iron incurred more errors on a visual searching task than those in the iron-supplemented condition.
conclusionThe physiologic need for iron during the period of rapid and critical brain development in young infants should be considered vis-à-vis the risks associated with supplementing nonanemic infants with high levels of iron.
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.