4.3 Article

Red blood cell and plasma phospholipid arachidonic and docosahexaenoic acid levels at birth and cognitive development at 4 years of age

期刊

EARLY HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
卷 69, 期 1-2, 页码 83-90

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-3782(02)00067-1

关键词

neonatal LCPUFA; DHA; AA; cognitive development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs) docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (AA) have biophysical properties that may mediate behavioral outcome, especially cognitive development. This. study examined the relationship between the LCPUFA-status at birth and cognitive development at 4 years of age. Methods: Cognitive development of 128 fullterm neonates, whose umbilical venous plasma and/or red blood cell phospholipid DHA and AA levels were known, was assessed at 4 years of age. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between cognitive development and DHA, AA, maternal intelligence, birth weight, duration of breast-feeding and paternal educational attainment. Multiple linear regressions were employed with cognitive development as the dependent variable and whereby the above-mentioned covariables were entered in step one while each of the four LCPUFAs was entered in step two. Results: In bivariate analysis, maternal intelligence, birth weight, maternal smoking habits during pregnancy, paternal education and duration of breast-feeding showed significant correlations with cognitive development (p < 0.01). The association of cognitive development with DHA and AA measured zero in bivariate analysis (plasma levels: r=0.03 and r=-0.03, respectively; erythrocyte levels: r=0.01 and r=0.05) and in multiple regression analysis (plasma DHA r=0.01, p=0.88; plasma AA r=0.02, p=0.80; erythrocyte DHA r=-0.01, p=0.95) except for erythrocyte AA (r=0.15, p=0.09). Conclusion: No evidence was found for an association of the DHA or AA-status at birth with cognitive development at 4 years of age. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据