The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: When sufficient maternal breast milk is not available, alternative forms of enteral nutrition for preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants are donor breast milk or artificial formula. Donor breast milk may retain some of the non-nutritive benefits of maternal breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. However, feeding with artificial formula may ensure more consistent delivery of greater amounts of nutrients. Uncertainty exists about the balance of risks and benefits of feeding formula versus donor breast milk for preterm or LBW infants. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk on growth and development in preterm or low birth weight (LBW) infants. SEARCH METHODS: We used the Cochrane Neonatal search strategy, including electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (until 8 June 2017), as well as conference proceedings and previous reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing feeding with formula versus donor breast milk in preterm or LBW infants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data independently. We analysed treatment effects as described in the individual trials and reported risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a fixed-effect model in meta-analyses and explored potential causes of heterogeneity in subgroup analyses. We assessed the quality of evidence for the main comparison at the outcome level using "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) methods. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven trials, in which 1809 infants participated in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Four trials compared standard term formula versus donor breast milk and seven compared nutrient-enriched preterm formula versus donor breast milk. Only the four most recent trials used nutrient-fortified donor breast milk. The trials contain various weaknesses in methodological quality, specifically concerns about allocation concealment in four trials and lack of blinding in most of the trials.Formula-fed infants had higher in-hospital rates of weight gain (mean difference (MD) 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93 to 3.08 g/kg/day), linear growth (MD 1.21, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.65 mm/week) and head growth (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23 mm/week). We did not find evidence of an effect on long-term growth or neurodevelopment. Formula feeding increased the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.85; risk difference (RD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.06).The GRADE quality of evidence was moderate for rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth (downgraded for high levels of heterogeneity) and was moderate for neurodevelopmental disability, all-cause mortality, and necrotising enterocolitis (downgraded for imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In preterm and LBW infants, feeding with formula compared with donor breast milk, either as a supplement to maternal expressed breast milk or as a sole diet, results in higher rates of weight gain, linear growth, and head growth and a higher risk of developing necrotising enterocolitis. The trial data do not show an effect on all-cause mortality, or on long-term growth or neurodevelopment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults
Kleinstäuber, M., Witthöft, M., Steffanowski, A., van Marwijk, H., Hiller, W., & Lambert, M. J. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010628.pub2 · Cited by 11,335
Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk
Breastfeeding, S. O. (2005) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-2491 · Cited by 5,323
Breastfeeding and the use of human milk
BREASTFEEDING, S. O., Eidelman, A. I., Schanler, R. J., Johnston, M., Landers, S., Noble, L., Szucs, K., & Viehmann, L. (2012) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3552 · Cited by 4,357
Breast milk and neonatal necrotising enterocolitis
Lucas, A., & Cole, T. J. (1990) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/0140-6736(90)93304-8 · Cited by 1,585
Agostoni, C., Buonocore, G., Carnielli, V., De Curtis, M., Darmaun, D., Decsi, T., Domellöf, M., Embleton, N., Fusch, C., Genzel‐Boroviczeny, O., et al. (2010) · Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition · doi:10.1097/mpg.0b013e3181adaee0 · Cited by 1,489
Self-citationPublished by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Modarresi, O. A. F., & Shakibaie, M. M. M. R. (2015) · Cited by 1,111
Sullivan, S., Schanler, R. J., Kim, J. H., Patel, A. L., Trawöger, R., Kiechl-Kohlendorfer, U., Chan, G. M., Blanco, C. L., Abrams, S., Cotten, C. M., et al. (2010) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2009.10.040 · Cited by 971
Schanler, R. J., Lau, C., Hurst, N. M., & Smith, E. O. (2005) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2004-1974 · Cited by 621
Randomized Trial of Exclusive Human Milk versus Preterm Formula Diets in Extremely Premature Infants
Cristofalo, E. A., Schanler, R. J., Blanco, C. L., Sullivan, S., Trawoeger, R., Kiechl-Kohlendorfer, U., Dudell, G., Rechtman, D. J., Lee, M. L., Lucas, A., et al. (2013) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.07.011 · Cited by 498
Cited by
European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome – 2019 Update
Sweet, D. G., Carnielli, V., Greisen, G., Hallman, M., Ozek, E., te Pas, A., Plavka, R., Roehr, C. C., Saugstad, O. D., Simeoni, U., et al. (2019) · Neonatology · doi:10.1159/000499361 · Cited by 1,613
The Intestinal Microbiome in Early Life: Health and Disease
Arrieta, M.-C., Stiemsma, L. T., Amenyogbe, N., Brown, E. M., & Finlay, B. (2014) · Frontiers in Immunology · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00427 · Cited by 1,024
Necrotizing enterocolitis: new insights into pathogenesis and mechanisms
Niño, D. F., Sodhi, C. P., & Hackam, D. J. (2016) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2016.119 · Cited by 616
Taylor, C., Joolay, Y., Buckle, A., & Lilford, R. (2018) · Maternal & Child Nutrition · doi:10.1111/mcn.12595 · Cited by 15
North, K., Marx Delaney, M., Bose, C., Lee, A. C. C., Vesel, L., Adair, L., & Semrau, K. (2021) · Maternal & Child Nutrition · doi:10.1111/mcn.13176 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Quigley, M., Embleton, N. D., & McGuire, W.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-06-20
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- CD002971-CD002971
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- OpenAlex
- W1480377400
- Cited by
- 719
- References
- 33
- FWCI
- 55.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd002971.pub4
- The paper
- Quigley, M., Embleton, N. D., & McGuire, W. (2018). Formula versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd002971.pub4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.