Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38645744›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2024

Could early life DHA supplementation benefit neurodevelopment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ruolan Hu, Juan Xu, Yimin Hua, Yifei Li, Jinrong Li

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ruolan Hu *Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children of MOE, Department of Pediatrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Juan Xu *Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children of MOE, Department of Pediatrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Yimin HuaKey Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children of MOE, Department of Pediatrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Yifei LiKey Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children of MOE, Department of Pediatrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Jinrong LiKey Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children of MOE, Department of Pediatrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Sichuan University · CNWest China Second University Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) plays a crucial role in the growth and functional development of the infant brain. However, the impact of additional DHA supplementation on neurodevelopment in infants remains controversial in randomized controlled trials. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to investigate the effects of prenatal and postnatal DHA supplementation on neurodevelopment. Methods: We systematically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic databases using a predefined strategy until 8 February 2024. We extracted relevant study characteristics and outcomes related to the nervous system. Two independent reviewers critically evaluated the included studies to assess their validity and risk of bias. Results: A total of 21 studies met our inclusion criteria, one study was removed after quality assessment, and the meta-analysis included 9 randomized controlled trials. The meta-analysis results indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the DHA supplementation group and the placebo group, as assessed by the Mental Development Index [MDI; mean difference (MD), 0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.91 to 1.73; Conclusion: Based on the BSID assessments, DHA supplementation in infants may have potential neurodevelopmental benefits. Because the meta-analysis included few high-quality articles and had some limitations, more relevant articles are needed to address the need for separate DHA supplementation in infants, pregnant women, and lactating mothers. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022348100, identifier: CRD42022348100.

Indexed as

DHAmeta-analysisoffspring neurodevelopmentsupplementationsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38645744
PMCPMC11032049
OpenAlexW4393987160

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.