SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2026
Vitamin B12 supplementation for growth, development, and cognition in children.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vitamin B12 in early childhood: a phenotype-guided approach to deficiency and unexpectedly elevated concentrations.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Severe Methylmalonic Acidemia Precipitated by Dietary B12 Deficiency in Vegan Toddler.Pediatric reports · 2026Article
- Vitamin BThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Micronutrient status and growth outcomes in children with cow's milk allergy: beyond elimination diets.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Cognitive profile and inflammatory markers in children and adolescents with specific learning disorder: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Characteristics of gut microbiota in children with language developmental delay.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleVitamin B
objectivesTo determine the effects of vitamin B SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 12 other databases, and two trial registries on 23 September 2025. We screened reference lists of studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials evaluating the effects of oral vitamin B OUTCOMES: Critical outcomes were vitamin B RISK OF BIAS: We used Cochrane RoB 2 to evaluate bias. SYNTHESIS
methodsWe conducted meta-analyses using fixed-effect models. If there was substantial heterogeneity, we used random-effect models. When meta-analyses were not conducted, we described findings from individual trials, and considered synthesis and presentation of findings using other methods. We used GRADE to evaluate the certainty of evidence for critical outcomes. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 16 trials (4083 children; 2 days to 11 years) in 10 countries, including India, Japan, Thailand, Nepal, United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, the United States, El Salvador, and Guatemala. Follow-up periods for outcomes in most studies ranged from five weeks to 31 months, with one study extending follow-up to nine years. Duration of vitamin B SYNTHESIS OF
resultsSupplementation with vitamin B AUTHORS'
conclusionsVitamin B
fundingThis review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol available via DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD015264.
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.