↓ Skip to main content

Effects of different arachidonic acid supplementation on psychomotor development in very preterm infants; a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

googleplus
4 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of different arachidonic acid supplementation on psychomotor development in very preterm infants; a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Nutrition Journal, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12937-015-0091-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ayham Alshweki, Alejandro Pérez Muñuzuri, Ana M. Baña, Ma. José de Castro, Fernando Andrade, Luís Aldamiz-Echevarría, Miguel Sáenz de Pipaón, José M. Fraga, María L. Couce

Abstract

Nutritional supplementation with polyunsaturated fatty acids is important in preterm infants neurodevelopment, but it is not known if the omega-6/omega-3 ratio affects this process. This study was designed to determine the effects of a balanced contribution of arachidonic acid in very preterm newborns fed with formula milk. This was a randomized trial, in which newborns <1500 g and/or <32 weeks gestational age were assigned to one of two groups, based on the milk formula they would receive during the first year of life. Initially, 60 newborns entered the study, but ultimately, group A was composed of 24 newborns, who were given formula milk with an ω-6/ω-3 ratio of 2/1, and Group B was composed of 21 newborns, given formula milk with an ω-6/ω-3 ratio of 1/1. The infants were followed up for two years: growth, visual-evoked potentials, brainstem auditory-evoked potentials, and plasma fatty acids were periodically measured, and psychomotor development was assessed using the Brunet Lézine scale at 24 months corrected age. A control group, for comparison of Brunet Lézine score, was made up of 25 newborns from the SEN1500 project, who were fed exclusively with breast milk. At 12 months, arachidonic acid values were significantly higher in group A than in group B (6.95 ± 1.55 % vs. 4.55 ± 0.78 %), as were polyunsaturated fatty acids (41.02 ± 2.09 % vs. 38.08 ± 2.32 %) achieved a higher average. Group A achieved a higher average Brunet Lézine score at 24 months than group B (99.9 ± 9 vs. 90.8 ± 11, p =0.028). The Brunet Lézine results from group A were compared with the control group results, with very similar scores registered between the two groups (99.9 ± 9 vs. 100.5 ± 7). There were no significant differences in growth or evoked potentials between the two formula groups. Very preterm infants who received formula with an ω-6/ω-3 ratio of 2/1 had higher blood levels of essential fatty acids during the first year of life, and better psychomotor development, compared with very preterm newborns who consumed formula with an ω-6/ω-3 of 1/1. Therefore, formula milk with an arachidonic acid quantity double that of docosahexaenoic acid should be considered for feeding very preterm infants. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02503020 .

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 116 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 22 19%
Unknown 38 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 17%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 41 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,464,013
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#863
of 1,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,557
of 274,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#28
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,626 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.