ReviewCureus2024
Effect of Smell and Taste of Milk on Feeding Parameters in Preterm Neonates: An Updated Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Multisensory stimulation for promoting development and preventing morbidity in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smell and taste sensations have been linked to positive outcomes in the feeding of premature infants, though the impact on the time required to transition to oral feeding remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the beneficial effects of smell and taste interventions on clinical outcomes in preterm infants. We conducted a search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception through September 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effects of smell and taste on clinical outcomes in preterm infants with a gestational age of less than 34 weeks. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the updated Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool (version 2). The primary outcome was the time required to achieve oral feeds. Secondary outcomes included the time to reach full enteral feeds, length of hospital stay, postmenstrual age, the need for parenteral nutrition, and the incidence of nosocomial infections. The outcomes were summarized as mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. A total of 12 RCTs involving 1,638 preterm infants were included in the analysis. The results showed that smell and taste interventions significantly reduced the time needed to reach oral feeds (MD = -1.37 days, 95% CI [-2.26, -0.48], p < 0.001; I² = 42.15%) compared to no intervention. These findings were consistent across subgroup analyses based on birth weight at admission, type of exposure, and sample size. However, no significant differences were found for the other secondary outcomes. In conclusion, smell and taste interventions significantly reduced the time to reach oral feeds, with similar outcomes for other clinical measures compared to no intervention. These findings suggest that smell and taste interventions could be used in the care of preterm infants, with the need for large-volume RCTs and long-term assessments being warranted.
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.