ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Subclinical thiamine deficiency in third-trimester pregnancy despite routine antenatal supplementation: a cross-sectional study in an urban setting, Bangkok, Thailand.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThiamine deficiency disorders (TDD) remain a preventable yet underrecognized contributor to maternal and infant morbidity, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. During pregnancy, thiamine deficiency may go undetected despite routine antenatal care and can lead to serious neurological and cardiac complications in breastfed infants. However, data on thiamine status in urban populations receiving standard antenatal supplementation are limited. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of thiamine deficiency in third-trimester pregnant women and to identify associated factors and clinical manifestations in an urban setting of Thailand.
methodsThis cross-sectional study enrolled pregnant women in the third-trimester (≥ 28 weeks of gestation) attending antenatal care in Bangkok, Thailand. Demographic characteristics, obstetric history, dietary habits, medication and supplement use, and TDD-related symptoms were collected using a structured questionnaire. Functional thiamine status was assessed using the erythrocyte transketolase activity coefficient (ETKAC), with abnormal thiamine status defined as ETKAC > 1.25. Penalized logistic regression with Firth's correction was used to identify factors associated with abnormal ETKAC.
resultsA total of 328 participants (mean age 28.9 years; mean gestational age 31.1 weeks) were included. Although 97.9% reported receiving at least one antenatal supplement, only 53.1% received formulations containing thiamine. Based on ETKAC, 17.7% demonstrated biochemical thiamine deficiency (ETKAC > 1.25). Consumption of refined carbohydrates without thiamine containing supplement was independently associated with deficiency (aOR 4.20, 95% CI 1.30-17.87). Clinical symptoms were nonspecific and largely similar between groups, except for reduced concentration or memory problems, which was more common among participants with thiamine deficiency (p = 0.007).
conclusionThese findings suggest that despite high antenatal supplementation coverage, nearly one-fifth of third-trimester pregnant women demonstrated biochemical evidence of subclinical thiamine deficiency. Routine clinical assessment was insufficient to identify affected individuals. These findings suggest that current antenatal supplementation strategies may be inadequate to ensure optimal thiamine status during late pregnancy and highlight the need to re-evaluate micronutrient policies in similar urban settings.
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.