SynthesisInternational breastfeeding journal2025
Impact of three mammalian milk-derived fortifiers on morbidity and mortality in preterm infants: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International breastfeeding journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Trial
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFortification of breast milk with milk-derived fortifiers is essential for the growth and developmental outcomes of preterm infants, yet the ideal fortifier remains uncertain. This network meta-analysis assessed the effects of bovine milk-derived fortifier (BMF), human milk-derived fortifier (HMF), and donkey milk-derived fortifier (DMF) on morbidity and mortality rates of preterm infants within neonatal intensive care units (NICUs).
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases, including MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, CNKI, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The risk of bias for each study was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool.
resultsTen studies involving 545 preterm infants were identified for qualitative descriptive analysis. network meta-analysis was conducted, incorporating data from five studies and three different types of milk-based fortifiers. The network meta-analysis suggested that HMF may be associated with a lower incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis. Compared with HMF, BMF was associated with an increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (RR = 2.33, 95% CI [1.22–4.44]). Cumulative ranking probabilities indicated that HMF appeared to be the most favourable fortifier for reducing both necrotizing enterocolitis incidence and mortality. DMF might represent a potential option for reducing the risk of intraventricular haemorrhage and neonatal sepsis.
conclusionHMF may be associated with a reduced incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis, whereas DMF may offer potential anti-inflammatory benefits, particularly for high-risk populations susceptible to intraventricular haemorrhage. This study provides direct and comparative evidence of the associations between different animal-derived fortifiers and morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. It provides a preliminary evaluation of DMF, for which limited evidence previously existed, and offers insight into the potential mechanisms that connect milk composition to clinical outcomes. However, these findings are primarily based on a limited number of studies with small sample sizes. Further randomized controlled trials are necessary to validate these observations.
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.