Cochrane · systematic review · CD000433
Protein supplementation of human milk for promoting growth in preterm infants
Amissah, EA, Brown, J, Harding, JE · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
6
No studies
1
Included studies
NR
No studies 1 · 14.3%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 42.9%Low 3 · 42.9%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Show all 2 versionsProtein supplementation compared to control for promoting growth in preterm infants
Population: preterm infants
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Growth: weight (weight gain g/kg/day) Protein supplementation vs control | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 101 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Growth: length (cm/week) Protein supplementation vs control | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 68 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Growth: head circumference (cm/week) Protein supplementation vs control | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 68 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Neurodevelopmental outcomes Protein supplementation vs control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Duration of hospital stay (days) Protein supplementation vs control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Feeding intolerance Protein supplementation vs control | RR 2.7 [0.13, 58.24] | 1 study · 17 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Necrotising enterocolitis Protein supplementation vs control | RR 1.11 [0.07, 18.49] | 1 study · 76 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |