Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39890230›Full record

SynthesisThe Lancet. Global health2025

The effects of prenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation and small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplementation on small vulnerable newborn types in low-income and middle-income countries: a meta-analysis of individual participant data.

Dongqing Wang, Enju Liu, Nandita Perumal, Uttara Partap, Ilana R Cliffer, Janaína Calu Costa, Molin Wang, Wafaie W Fawzi, Gestational Weight Gain Pooling Project Consortium

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Lancet. Global health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Micronutrients in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Mini-Review Article.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dongqing WangDepartment of Global and Community Health, College of Public Health, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA. Electronic address: dwang25@gmu.edu.
Enju LiuInstitutional Centers for Clinical and Translational Research and Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Nandita PerumalDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Uttara PartapDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Ilana R ClifferDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Janaína Calu CostaDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Molin WangDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Biostatistics, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Wafaie W FawziDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Nutrition, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Gestational Weight Gain Pooling Project Consortium

Funding

Nutrition-specific interventions to improve long-term maternal-child health outcomesUG1HD076474 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Edwin Jose Asturias, NANCY F KREBS · 2018 to 2026
$5.4M
Gates Foundation INV-007640Gates Foundation INV-016436NICHD NIH HHS UG1 HD076474
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmall vulnerable newborn types, defined by combinations of being born too soon or too small, have distinct determinants and health consequences. We aimed to assess the effects of prenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) and small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplementation (SQ-LNS) on small vulnerable newborn types, which are currently unknown.

methodsIn this meta-analysis, individual participant data from randomised controlled trials of MMS and randomised controlled trials of SQ-LNS in low-income and middle-income countries were used. We systematically searched the literature using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify randomised controlled trials of prenatal nutritional supplementation using MMS or SQ-LNS among pregnant people published between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 31, 2021. Studies were excluded if they were conducted exclusively among participants selected by pre-existing health conditions, such as anaemia status, HIV infection, or diabetes. We contacted the corresponding authors of all identified studies to seek data contribution. As individual participant data became available, we mapped relevant variables and harmonised the data across studies. Iron and folic acid supplementation was the control group in most studies. Newborns were classified into ten groups through the combinations of preterm or term birth, small, appropriate, and large for gestational age, and low birthweight (LBW) or non-LBW. Newborns were also analysed using a four-group categorisation of preterm or term and LBW or non-LBW. Log-binomial models were used to estimate study-specific risk ratios (RRs), which were pooled using meta-analyses.

findings14 randomised controlled trials of MMS (n=42 618; the mean maternal age at study enrolment was 24·3 years [SD 5.6]; 22 086 [51·8%] male neonates and 20 532 [48·2%] female neonates) and four randomised controlled trials of SQ-LNS (n=6246; the mean maternal age at study enrolment was 23·3 years [SD 5·3]; 3137 [50·2%] male neonates and 3109 [49·8%] female neonates) were used. In the ten-group categorisation of small vulnerable newborns, prenatal MMS reduced the risk of preterm-small for gestational age (SGA)-LBW (RR 0·73, 95% CI 0·64-0·84; p=0·0003); preterm-appropriate for gestational age (AGA)-LBW (0·82, 0·74-0·91; p=0·0010); preterm-AGA-non-LBW (0·89, 0·80-0·98; p=0·019); term-SGA-LBW (0·91, 0·85-0·96; p=0·0046); and term-SGA-non-LBW (0·95, 0·90-1·00; p=0·050). In the four-group categorisation, prenatal MMS reduced the risk of preterm-SGA (0·71, 0·62-0·82; p=0·0002) and term-SGA (0·93, 0·89-0·98; p=0·0066). Prenatal SQ-LNS had no significant effects on the risk of giving birth to small vulnerable newborns except for preterm-large for gestational age-non-LBW in the ten-group categorisation (0·78, 0·65-0·94; p=0·023).

interpretationPrenatal MMS and SQ-LNS reduce the risk of giving birth to small vulnerable newborns to varying extents, with the greatest magnitude of effects observed for small vulnerable newborn types that confer the greatest neonatal mortality risk. This study underscores the importance of nutritional supplements in prenatal care.

fundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesDietary SupplementsLipidsMicronutrientsPrenatal CareFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, Small for Gestational AgePregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicLipidsMicronutrients

Identifiers

PMID39890230
PMCPMC11782989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.