Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Formula Supplementation With Long-chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: Are There Developmental Benefits?

Scott, David T., Janowsky, Jeri S., Carroll, Robin E., Taylor, James A., Auestad, Nancy, Montalto, Michael B.·1998·Pediatrics

Abstract

Objective.: To evaluate the developmental outcomes of children who participated in an augmented randomized clinical trial of supplementing a standard infant formula with long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. Design.: Randomized clinical trial, augmented with a nonrandomized human milk comparison group. There were three randomized formula groups: standard formula, standard formula containing docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), and standard formula containing DHA and arachidonic acid. Setting.: Three clinical sites serving diverse populations: Kansas City, MO; Portland, OR; and Seattle, WA. Participants.: A total of 274 healthy full-term infants were enrolled in the infant-feeding protocol; of these, 197 (72%) participated in assessments of developmental outcome. Formula Supplements.: In the randomized trial, one group received a standard formula, another group received a formula that had been supplemented with DHA from fish oil, and a third group received a formula supplemented with both DHA and arachidonic acid from an egg phospholipid. Outcome Measures.: Mental and Motor Scales of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development at 12 months of age; vocabulary and gesture communication scores from the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories at 14 months of age. Results.: There were no statistically significant differences for either the Bayley Mental Scale or the Bayley Motor Scale, neither when the analysis was restricted to the three randomized formula groups nor when the analysis included all four groups. However, the DHA formula group had significantly lower scores on two of the MacArthur scales: the DHA group scored lower than the nonrandomized human milk comparison group on the Vocabulary Comprehension Scale, and the DHA group scored lower than the randomized control formula group on the Vocabulary Production Scale. Moreover, additional analyses both in the formula groups and in the human milk comparison group found significant negative correlations between DHA levels and vocabulary outcomes. Conclusion.: We believe that additional research should be undertaken before the introduction of these supplements into standard infant formulas.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.102.5.e59

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 160

Metadata

Authors
Scott, D. T., Janowsky, J. S., Carroll, R. E., Taylor, J. A., Auestad, N., & Montalto, M. B.
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
1998-11-01
Volume
102
Issue
5
Pages
e59-e59
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2138233827
Cited by
160
References
0
FWCI
9.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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 Supplementation With Long-chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: Are There Developmental Benefits? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1542/peds.102.5.e59
The paper
Scott, D. T., Janowsky, J. S., Carroll, R. E., Taylor, J. A., Auestad, N., & Montalto, M. B. (1998). Formula Supplementation With Long-chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: Are There Developmental Benefits? Pediatrics. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.102.5.e59

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.