4.3 Article

Cognitive function in 18-month-old term infants of the DIAMOND study: A randomized, controlled clinical trial with multiple dietary levels of docosahexaenoic acid

期刊

EARLY HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
卷 87, 期 3, 页码 223-230

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2010.12.047

关键词

Docosahexaenoic acid; Infant; Cognitive development

资金

  1. Mead Johnson Nutrition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Studies investigating cognitive outcomes following docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation of infant formula yield conflicting results, perhaps due to inadequate dietary concentrations. Aim: To determine the optimal DHA concentration in term formula to support cognitive maturation. Design: This was a double-masked, randomized, controlled, prospective trial. A total of 181 infants were enrolled at 1-9 days of age and assigned randomly to receive one of four term infant formulas with one of four levels of docosahexaenoic acid: Control (0% DHA), 0.32% DHA, 0.64% DHA, or 0.96% DHA. All DHA-supplemented formulas contained 0.64% arachidonic acid (ARA). Infants were fed the assigned formulas until 12 months of age. One hundred forty-one children completed the 12-month feeding trial and were eligible for this study. Cognitive function was assessed in 131 children at 18 months of age using the Bayley Scales of Infant Development II (BSID II). Results: There were no diet group differences on the Mental Development Index (MDI), the Psychomotor Development Index (PDI), or the Behavior Rating Scale (BRS) of the BSID II. However, when the scores of children who received any of the three DHA-supplemented formulas were combined and compared to control children, a significant difference emerged: the MDI scores of DHA-supplemented children were higher (104.1 v.98.4; p = 0.02). Conclusions: These results suggest that dietary supplementation of DHA during the first year of life leads to enhanced cognitive development at 18 months of age. DHA concentration of 0.32% is adequate to improve cognitive function; higher concentrations did not confer additional benefit. (C) 2011 Elsevier 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