Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T18:34:07.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of micronutrient supplements on low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries: a systematic quantitative literature review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2020

Janelle M James-McAlpine*
Affiliation:
School of Medical Science, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, QLD 4015, Australia School of Nursing and Midwifery, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Meadowbrook, QLD 4131, Australia
Lisa Vincze
Affiliation:
School of Allied Health Sciences, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, QLD 4015, Australia
Jessica J Vanderlelie
Affiliation:
Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia
Anthony V Perkins
Affiliation:
School of Medical Science, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Southport, QLD 4015, Australia
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To assess the quantity and focus of recent empirical research regarding the effect of micronutrient supplementation on live birth outcomes in low-risk pregnancies from high-income countries.

Design:

A systematic quantitative literature review.

Setting:

Low-risk pregnancies in World Bank-classified high-income countries, 2019.

Results:

Using carefully selected search criteria, a total of 2475 publications were identified, of which seventeen papers met the inclusion criteria for this review. Data contributing to nine of the studies were sourced from four cohorts; research originated from ten countries. These cohorts exhibited a large number of participants, stable data and a low probability of bias. The most recent empirical data offered by these studies was 2011; the most historical was 1980. In total, fifty-five categorical outcome/supplement combinations were examined; 67·3 % reported no evidence of micronutrient supplementation influencing selected outcomes.

Conclusions:

A coordinated, cohesive and uniform empirical approach to future studies is required to determine what constitutes appropriate, effective and safe micronutrient supplementation in contemporary cohorts from high-income countries, and how this might influence pregnancy outcomes.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
© The Authors 2020

Evidence regarding the effect of malnutrition on pregnancy outcomes has been extensively documented(Reference Triunfo and Lanzone1Reference Abu-Saad and Fraser4), with micronutrient supplement interventions traditionally focused on low- and middle-income countries(Reference Bhutta, Das and Rizvi5). This is in part due to the disproportionate rate of poor perinatal outcomes attributable to malnutrition compared to high-income regions(Reference Beck, Wojdyla and Say6,Reference Kavle and Landry7) . However, suboptimal nutrition also represents a significant public health concern in high-income countries as a result of undernourishment, over-nourishment or micronutrient deficiency(8). Despite this knowledge, women from high-income countries represent an under-researched population(Reference Wolf, Hegaard and Huusom2).

Over recent years, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews has thoroughly examined published research regarding the effect of multiple micronutrient supplements (MuMS)(Reference Keats, Haider and Tam3), folic acid(Reference Lassi, Salam and Haider9), iron(Reference Peña-Rosas, De-Regil and Garcia-Casal10), zinc(Reference Ota, Mori and Middleton11), calcium(Reference Buppasiri, Lumbiganon and Thinkhamrop12), iodine(Reference Harding, Peña-Rosas and Webster13) and vitamin D(Reference De-Regil, Palacios and Lombardo14) on pregnancy outcomes. However, the majority of studies exhibited vast heterogeneity in data, cohorts, context and examined outcomes, with many reporting low or no evidence of significant benefits of supplements in low-risk women and high-income countries. Further, each Cochrane review cautiously highlights the need for further randomised controlled trials in view of perceived pregnancy risks and ethical considerations(Reference Keats, Haider and Tam3,Reference Lassi, Salam and Haider9Reference Harding, Peña-Rosas and Webster13) . Despite these limitations, systematic reviews remain the foundation of clinical practice recommendations(1517).

This is potentially problematic in that the effects of supplementation in the absence of identified deficiency, low-risk pregnancies and high-income countries are largely unknown. This review and synthesis of contemporary empirical research aimed to determine how, where and when empirical research was conducted, the cohorts studied, and who the major publishers are in this field. In addition, this review identifies what has been most commonly studied in terms of demographics, outcomes, supplements and their timing over the last decade, and synthesises a consensus of findings relating to the effect of micronutrient supplements on the birth outcomes of low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries. Identified research deficits and implications for policy and practice are subsequently discussed.

Methods

The systematic quantitative literature review

Systematic literature reviews are commonly used in the health sector and are an important component of evidence-based health care, assisting in the development and maintenance of guidelines and policies, institutional and personal practice(Reference Boren and Moxley18). However, while systematic reviews aid in the identification of knowledge gaps, they do not necessarily highlight research deficits(Reference Pickering and Byrne19). The systematic quantitative literature review is emerging in a range of scientific disciplines as an appropriate methodology in heterogeneous research contexts. The quantitative approach facilitates an analysis of varying approaches in discipline, design, context, intent and methodology(Reference Pickering and Byrne19). This review is systematic in that a structured framework has been used to establish project parameters, assess the literature and construct a database of literature for review according to PRISMA guidelines(Reference Moher, Liberati and Tetzlaff20).

The Pickering and Byrne(Reference Pickering and Byrne19) approach utilises a unique fifteen-step process that encourages researchers to develop a categorisation framework based on an iterative and inductive process to develop, implement and present their review – a process consistent with but more detailed than traditional systematic reviews(Reference Wakefield21,Reference Whittemore and Knafl22) . A significant benefit of this quantitative methodology is that the examination technique expands rather than refines the depth of the review(Reference Pickering and Byrne19); research gaps are easily identified under these systematic conditions in addition to research ‘hotspots’. This differs from traditional systematic reviews in which the examination commences with a broad foundation, and content is deductively reduced, limiting the scope of the review to collation of current knowledge and relying on deductive reasoning to identify research deficits(Reference Pickering and Byrne19). As such, this approach is appropriate for areas of research with a diversity of scope(Reference Pickering and Byrne19), a feature demonstrated by the literature regarding supplementation during pregnancy, the range of micronutrients, outcomes, settings and demographic groups studied, and the methodologies employed to do so.

This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations(Reference Moher, Liberati and Tetzlaff20) and conforms to the systematic quantitative literature review approach described by Pickering and Byrne(Reference Pickering and Byrne19). The PRISMA flowchart (Fig. 1) details the review process; methods and results are detailed according to PRISMA reporting criteria.

Fig. 1 PRISMA flow diagram(Reference Moher, Liberati and Tetzlaff41)

Search strategy

To identify papers examining the effects of micronutrient supplementation on the birth outcomes of low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries, a systematic search was conducted using the electronic databases CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Scholar from 1 March 2009 to 1 March 2019, a timeframe determined by the recent systematic reviews(Reference Keats, Haider and Tam3,Reference Lassi, Salam and Haider9Reference Harding, Peña-Rosas and Webster13) . A literature search was conducted using a combination of the following keywords: (supplement* OR vitamin* OR mineral OR micronutrient OR ‘micro nutrient’ OR micro-nutrient) AND (‘high income’ OR developed OR industrial* OR ‘first world’) AND ((birth OR pregnanc*) AND outcomes). Studies were considered eligible if original, peer-reviewed, detailing empirical data pertaining to supplementation in low-risk pregnancies (including the periconception period), examining live birth outcomes in relation to supplementation in either primary or secondary capacity, undertaken on women living in high-income countries according to 2019 indexes(23), and published in English language within the last 10 years.

Selection criteria

All papers were screened by the first author by title and/or abstract for suitability; discussion papers, papers examining supplementation in non-pregnant populations or low- and middle-income regions, or in the presence of known pregnancy risks, or reporting haematological values alone were excluded. Similarly, errant results with no reference to pregnancy outcomes and micronutrient supplementation were excluded. References cited by each study and meeting stage one eligibility were reviewed to identify additional potential studies; systematic reviews were excluded. Full-text versions of all studies passing this initial screening were reviewed in detail. A second screening was employed whereby a study was excluded if it did not meet the established parameters. Included and excluded papers were recorded at each screening stage according to the PRISMA statement. Risk of bias was assessed at a study level; each addressed the potential for bias within the individual research protocol or discussion. Two included papers were known to the authors and included as additional resources. Both papers met the selection criteria and, as such, selection bias was considered minimal. The analysis of reviewed articles is reported in terms of bibliographic details and research design, examined variables and key findings.

Categories

Characteristics regarding the nature and scope of research surrounding the effects of micronutrient supplementation on the outcomes of low-risk pregnancies in high-income countries were measured across a range of emergent categories(Reference Pickering and Byrne19).

The final categories comprised bibliographic details (authors, year, title, journal, genre), settings and methods (country (state, region), study/cohort, year of collection, funding source, number of participants, method (observational/experimental – single/double-blinded randomised controlled trial, single/multisite), descriptive groups (ethnicity, age group, parity, BMI, smoker, education, socioeconomic status), trimester (periconception, trimester 1, 2, 3, 1 & 2, 2 & 3 and 1, 2 & 3), supplementation (MuMS, folic acid, vitamin C/vitamin E, vitamin D, zinc, iron, calcium, DHA, supplement combinations) and birth outcomes (pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, induction of labour, birth < 37 weeks, birth > 41 weeks, gestation at birth, low birthweight/small for gestational age, birthweight). Subcategories were created on an emergent basis; all affirmative categories were recorded in a spreadsheet with value 1 and totalled at the end of analysis. The frequency of examined variables was documented along with reference numbers (online supplementary material).

Results

A total of 2475 potentially relevant studies were identified. Of the fifty-one full-text articles meeting stage one and two criteria, seventeen were retained for quantitative analyses in this systematic review(Reference Alwan, Greenwood and Simpson24Reference Vanderlelie, Scott and Shibl40) (Fig. 1, Table 1). Of the thirty-four papers excluded, sixteen were systematic reviews(Reference Keats, Haider and Tam3,Reference Lassi, Salam and Haider9Reference Ota, Mori and Middleton11,Reference Harvey, Holroyd and Ntani42Reference Thorne-Lyman and Fawzi53) , four were systematic reviews with meta-analyses(Reference Wolf, Hegaard and Huusom2,Reference Wen, White and Rybak54Reference Wagner, McNeil and Johnson56) and two presented meta-analyses alone(Reference Dror and Allen57,Reference Fekete, Berti and Trovato58) . A further six were discussion papers(Reference Buppasiri, Lumbiganon and Thinkhamrop12,Reference Berti, Biesalski and Gärtner59Reference Curtis, Moon and Harvey63) , four included women with an identified risk(Reference Bánhidy, Dakhlaoui and Dudás64) or diagnosis of pregnancy-related morbidities (pre-eclampsia(Reference Haider, Olofin and Wang65,Reference Haider, Yakoob and Bhutta66) and gestational diabetes(Reference De-Regil, Palacios and Lombardo14)), one study was ceased due to adverse outcomes(Reference Harding, Peña-Rosas and Webster13) and one examined a particular micronutrient administered in a MuMS formulation(Reference Xu, Perez-Cuevas and Xiong67) (online supplementary material).

Table 1 List of papers included in this review

Bibliographic details and design

Authors and data pools

A total of 103 authors were credited with authorship across the eligible papers. Sixteen authors were responsible for first authorship of the seventeen; one author was responsible for first authorship of two papers(Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27,Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28) . Large birth cohorts were responsible for generating the majority of data: the Danish National Birth Cohort (DNBC 1997–2003, n 2)(Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27,Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28) , Norwegian Mother and Baby cohort (MoBA 2002–9, n 2)(Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31,Reference Nilsen, Vollset and Monsen35) , Environments for Healthy Living cohort (EFHL 2006–11, n 2)(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34,Reference Vanderlelie, Scott and Shibl40) and the New England, USA dataset (collected with support from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development’s (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network 1996–2008, n 3)(Reference Hauth, Clifton and Roberts32,Reference Martinussen, Bracken and Triche33,Reference Roberts, Myatt and Spong38) , which all accounted for the bulk of eligible papers (Table 1). Additionally, RHEA (2007–8)(Reference Papadopoulou, Stratakis and Roumeliotaki36), Generation R (2002–6)(Reference Timmermans, Jaddoe and Hofman39) and Infancia y Medio Ambiente(Reference Pastor-Valero, Navarrete-Muñoz and Rebagliato37) cohorts (2004–5) contributed to the final data pool (n 147 323 women).

Five countries each contributed one unique cohort and one subsequent publication to the field of research (Table 1); Australia(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34,Reference Vanderlelie, Scott and Shibl40) , Denmark(Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27,Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28) and Norway(Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31,Reference Nilsen, Vollset and Monsen35) each contributed one cohort from their respective countries; each of these cohorts contributed data to two unique papers. The United Kingdom added a further two studies on independent cohorts to the research(Reference Alwan, Greenwood and Simpson24,Reference Brough, Rees and Crawford25) . The United States was responsible for three studies originating from one cohort of women(Reference Martinussen, Bracken and Triche33), two of which reported the same intervention on different outcomes(Reference Hauth, Clifton and Roberts32,Reference Roberts, Myatt and Spong38) . The United States contributed an additional unique cohort and intervention to the pool of research(Reference Carlson, Colombo and Gajewski26) (Table 1).

Year of publication and research methodologies

The quantity of empirical studies has declined over the past decade. While 2009 and 2010 both returned five qualifying studies each, the years 2011–16 produced seven empirical studies in total. No research meeting these parameters was found after 2016 (Table 1). The majority were observational studies (n 12); of these, nine were conducted in multicentre collaborations (75·0 %). Multicentre research also accounted for two out of the five experimental studies(Reference Hauth, Clifton and Roberts32,Reference Roberts, Myatt and Spong38) (40 %), with the remainder being conducted with a single-centre approach(Reference Brough, Rees and Crawford25,Reference Carlson, Colombo and Gajewski26,Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29) . All experimental studies were randomised controlled trials; four of these used double-blinded methodologies (Table 1) with the remaining ones being blinded to participants but not researchers(Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29).

Genres and journals

Covering four genres, nutrition(Reference Brough, Rees and Crawford25Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27,Reference Nilsen, Vollset and Monsen35Reference Pastor-Valero, Navarrete-Muñoz and Rebagliato37,Reference Timmermans, Jaddoe and Hofman39,Reference Vanderlelie, Scott and Shibl40) (n 8, 47·1 %), medicine(Reference Alwan, Greenwood and Simpson24,Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29,Reference Czeizel, Puhó and Langmar30,Reference Hauth, Clifton and Roberts32,Reference Martinussen, Bracken and Triche33,Reference Roberts, Myatt and Spong38) (n 6, 35·3 %), epidemiology(Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28,Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31) (n 2, 11·8 %) and midwifery(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34) (n 1, 5·9 %) journals produced all eligible articles. The British (Reference Brough, Rees and Crawford25,Reference Pastor-Valero, Navarrete-Muñoz and Rebagliato37,Reference Timmermans, Jaddoe and Hofman39) (n 3) and American (Reference Carlson, Colombo and Gajewski26,Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27) Journals of Nutrition (n 2) published eligible research most frequently, along with the European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology (Reference Czeizel, Puhó and Langmar30,Reference Martinussen, Bracken and Triche33) (n 2) and the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (Reference Alwan, Greenwood and Simpson24,Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29) (n 2). A further eight journals published one study each(Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28,Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31,Reference Hauth, Clifton and Roberts32,Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34Reference Papadopoulou, Stratakis and Roumeliotaki36,Reference Roberts, Myatt and Spong38,Reference Vanderlelie, Scott and Shibl40) . These journals were produced by a range of publishers.

Variables examined

Supplements

In total, nine micronutrients – either alone or in combination – were examined with empirical research methodology in the specified timeframe (Table 1). Folic acid was the most frequently examined supplement (n 10). Of these ten studies, three examined the use of folic acid in combination with either a multivitamin (n 2)(Reference Czeizel, Puhó and Langmar30,Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34) or iron(Reference Papadopoulou, Stratakis and Roumeliotaki36) (n 1). MuMS were examined independently in five studies, iron in two(Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29,Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34) ; vitamins C and E in combination accounted for two studies(Reference Hauth, Clifton and Roberts32,Reference Roberts, Myatt and Spong38) and one study examined zinc and calcium both independently and in combination with all previously mentioned micronutrients(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34). Studies evaluating the roles of DHA(Reference Carlson, Colombo and Gajewski26) (n 1) and vitamin D(Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31) (n 1) in pregnancy outcomes were performed in the absence of other supplements.

Outcomes

Reporting of birth outcomes was limited to gestation at birth (continuous, n 8; categorical, <37 weeks, n 10, >41 weeks, n 1), birthweight (continuous, n 8; low birthweight (<2500 g/small for gestational age <10th centile), n 12), onset of labour (n 2) and the development of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy (including pre-eclampsia, n 6; gestational diabetes, n 2; Table 1).

Timing of supplementation

Supplement use was examined across all three trimesters of pregnancy in six of the studies (Table 1). A further five examined supplement use in the periconception period only, that is, 3 months before conception through until 3 months after conception. Examination exclusively by trimester was performed by the minority (Table 1).

Demographic groups

Maternal age was recorded by all papers and reported as mean and standard deviation of a continuous variable in nine of the seventeen studies (Table 1). Categorisation by maternal age groups was difficult given the lack of consistency in age group categories between the remaining studies. A total of twenty-seven age group categories were reported among the eight studies, citing the division of maternal age into categorical variables for ages <18 to ≥40 years. The age groups ranged from two- to nine-year spans, preventing category reduction through combination and descriptive reporting of age group representation in the cohort as a whole.

Ethnicity was poorly reported in these studies, with seven of the eligible papers not declaring ethnicity (Table 1); a further two recorded the country of birth rather than ethnic background(Reference Alwan, Greenwood and Simpson24,Reference Timmermans, Jaddoe and Hofman39) . For those that recorded ethnic identity, 44 % (n 12 154) of the combined cohort recorded ethnicity as ‘other’. Hispanic was the most frequently recorded ethnic origin (n 4), followed by Caucasian (n 2), African American (n 2) and the generic category ‘Black’ (n 2). Nine individual ethnicities were recorded in these studies (Table 1).

Parity was well reported, with all papers reporting it as a descriptive variable. While 88 % (n 15) of these did not report associations with outcomes (Table 1), two did – one exclusively examined supplementation in nulliparous women(Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31), the other reported differences between women in first and subsequent pregnancies(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34). The majority of research was undertaken in nulliparous women (n 78 520, 62 %). Smoking status was reported by 76 % of the papers (n 13); four papers did not provide such details(Reference Brough, Rees and Crawford25,Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29,Reference Czeizel, Puhó and Langmar30,Reference Nilsen, Vollset and Monsen35) . Smokers comprised 15 % (n 18 730) of the total cohort that reported smoking habits (n 122 967).

Reporting of education level and socioeconomic status (SES) was inconsistent. Education level was unrecorded or reported as years completed (±sd) in all but two studies(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34,Reference Pastor-Valero, Navarrete-Muñoz and Rebagliato37) . SES was more frequently recorded, with low- (n 4), middle- (n 2) and high-income categories (n 2) examined to some extent (Table 1).

Key findings

In total, fifty-five categorical outcome/supplement combinations were examined across these seventeen publications. Of these, 67·3 % (n 37) found no evidence of increasing or decreasing risk of the selected outcomes due to micronutrient supplementation. A decrease in the risk of suboptimal outcomes was detected in 25·5 % (n 14), while the risk was found to have increased in 7·3 % (n 4) of combinations (Table 2). Two studies reported a reduction in the risk of low birthweight with the use of folic acid in the periconception period(Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27,Reference Timmermans, Jaddoe and Hofman39) and iron supplementation in trimesters 2 and 3(Reference Chan, Chan and Lam29).

Table 2 Number of studies and effects by outcomes

SGA, small for gestational age.

A reduction in risk was found in a majority of studies examining hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and preterm birth. Four of the included studies contributed to this consensus, three of which examined the use of MuMS and/or folic acid(Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28,Reference Martinussen, Bracken and Triche33,Reference Vanderlelie, Scott and Shibl40) . The remaining study reported a reduced risk of pre-eclampsia by vitamin D supplementation in the context of nulliparous pregnancy(Reference Haugen, Brantsæter and Trogstad31). MuMS were found to reduce the risk of preterm birth and pre-eclampsia in the two separate Danish cohort studies; this did not extend to folic acid supplementation(Reference Catov, Bodnar and Olsen27,Reference Catov, Nohr and Bodnar28) .

However, one study examining MuMS across the whole gestation reported an increased risk of preterm birth(Reference Alwan, Greenwood and Simpson24); another reported an increased risk of small-for-gestational-age infants in women using iron supplements in the first and second trimesters(Reference Papadopoulou, Stratakis and Roumeliotaki36). An increased risk for birth beyond 41 completed weeks in women using supplement combinations in the third trimester was reported by one of the two related papers(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34); induction of labour was reported to be higher in this study. No evidence of benefit or harm was reported with regard to micronutrient supplementation and the development of gestational diabetes.

Discussion

This review aimed to quantify and characterise recently published empirical studies that examined the effects of micronutrient supplementation on birth outcomes in high-income countries. A systematic quantitative literature review methodology(Reference Pickering and Byrne19) facilitated the identification of a number of challenges faced by research in this field. These include data pool limitations, diversity of methodologies and lack of research in supplement use beyond the first trimester.

Data informing this research originated from about ten countries; however, these ten countries represent only 12 % of the high-income countries based on the World Bank ranking(23). Further, four cohorts provided data for nine of these studies. These cohorts reported data pertaining to a large number of participants, thereby reducing the potential of recruitment bias(Reference Nohr, Frydenberg and Henriksen68Reference Nohr and Liew71). However, the low number of unique data pools is problematic, in that data typifies its specific population(Reference Mai, Isenburg and Langlois72). This resulted in homogeneity within each data extraction irrespective of the intended investigation and prevented a comparison of the efficacy of interventions between different descriptive groups. Further, heterogeneity was present within the methodology of each study, with a lack of consistency contributing to a lack of cohesion between reported findings.

Another problem faced by researchers in this field is the currency of data available for examination. The most recent empirical data offered by these studies pertained to 2011; some data was collected nearly four decades ago, although getting published in 2009(Reference Czeizel, Puhó and Langmar30). These datasets and their demographic foci are representative of known health risk groups at the time of data collection. However, baseline maternal health and diets have changed substantially in this timeframe(Reference Hanson, Bhutta and Dain73). Physical determinants such as obesity and poor nutrition are driving factors for non-communicable diseases such as essential hypertension, heart disease and diabetes in high-income countries(Reference Firoz, McCaw-Binns and Filippi74). These historically rare concerns represent significant risks during pregnancy and are increasingly affecting birth outcomes(Reference Hanson, Bhutta and Dain73). Determining the effects of dietary supplementation in women who might experience these comorbidities is vital if improvements are to be made in associated perinatal morbidities.

Similarly, cultural factors influencing the nutrition status in high-income countries have changed substantially over time, with increasing immigration and inevitable transference of sociocultural norms across international boundaries(Reference Maskileyson75). This acculturation has resulted in a diversity in baseline health status and food selection practices of pregnant populations in high-income countries(Reference Erten, Van Den Berg and Weissing76Reference Thomas, Schubert and Whittaker78). Hence, the nutritional needs of pregnant women in contemporary high-income regions differ considerably from those of the cohorts detailed by existing studies. This highlights a knowledge gap regarding the needs and effects of micronutrient supplementation in women from culturally diverse backgrounds. As such, high-quality contemporary data are necessary to ascertain the implications and effects of micronutrient interventions in the context of high-income countries. Randomised controlled trials incorporating baseline nutrition status, biological sampling, supplementation and birth outcomes in specific demographic groups would be a valuable step towards gathering relevant evidence and improving the birth outcomes of culturally diverse women in today’s multicultural societies.

The translation of research into practice in the field of supplementation during pregnancy faces a number of challenges. Global, national and state health organisations rely on data synthesis and systematic reviews to inform clinical recommendations(17). While systematic reviews are a gold standard for evidence-based practice(Reference Boren and Moxley18), they rely on existing data and publications. However, with the exception of periconception folic acid, the level of evidence informing supplementation guidelines is universally poor. This has resulted in guidelines – being founded on consensus-based recommendations – advising the use and timing of specific supplements during pregnancy. This challenges a consistent dissemination of information among and between health professionals and the wider community, resulting in advices influenced by opinions, rhetoric, anecdotes and a widespread belief that supplements are harmless(Reference Marinello, Buckton and Combet79). However, emerging evidence suggests that an inappropriate use of supplements may be detrimental to select birth outcomes(Reference McAlpine, Scott and Scuffham34). Outcomes examined reflect morbidity and mortality associated with pre-eclampsia(Reference Lisonkova, Sabr and Mayer80), preterm labour(Reference Beck, Wojdyla and Say6) and low birthweight(Reference Conde-Agudelo and Díaz-Rossello81) infants. However, gestational length beyond 38 completed weeks has also been found to exhibit a linear increase with poor perinatal outcomes(Reference de Vries, Barratt and McGeechan82). These include an inherent risk of the aging placenta(Reference Smith83) and an increased risk of medical intervention and related sequelae(Reference Walker and Gan84).

Several important supplements were absent from these studies, including those considered beneficial (selenium for the prevention of hypertensive disorders(Reference Xu, Guo and Gu85)) or much recommended (iodine to meet increased need during pregnancy(15)). Both these micronutrients could be toxic if used in excess(Reference Ventura, Melo and Carrilho86), so well-regulated studies would be required if cohort-specific interventions were proposed. However, recommending such supplements in the absence of an identified deficiency would incur an inherent risk. Further, while folic acid supplementation is highly beneficial in the prevention of neural tube defects in the periconception period(Reference Garrett and Bailey87), little evidence exists describing its effect in the subsequent trimesters. Trimester-specific interventions with all supplements were highly variable, causing an inability to determine timely windows of opportunity for specific addition or withdrawal of supplementation to optimise outcomes.

The paucity of research surrounding supplementation during pregnancy will prevent making an accurate estimation of the percentage of women using such supplements. However, the demonstrated knowledge gap along with the reliance of clinicians and consumers on unsubstantiated information would contribute to a high predicted growth of the global pregnancy supplement market, which is estimated to reach a value of $674 million by 2025(88). Since little contemporary empirical research data regarding supplement use during pregnancy is available globally, evidence informing the current policies and recommendations remains questionable. As such, understanding the associations between micronutrient supplements and birth outcomes in high-income countries is a matter of research priority.

Conclusion

Data informing our systematic review pertaining to the effects of micronutrient supplementation on birth outcomes in low-risk women in high-income countries are limited due to a lack of current research, limited data pools, heterogeneity in methodologies and traditional dissemination of research to primary health practitioners. Over two-thirds of reports presented no evidence of benefit or harm to birth outcomes as a result of supplementation in low-risk women in high-income countries. Heterogeneity in methodologies used and lack of specificity regarding demographic grouping confound findings regarding what constitutes appropriate and effective supplementation, challenging the application of such findings to practice. A coordinated, cohesive and uniform empirical approach is required to determine what constitutes appropriate, effective and safe micronutrient supplementation during pregnancy in contemporary cohorts from high-income countries.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements: None. Financial support: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Conflict of interest: None. Authorship: J.M.M. designed the research and the maternal outcomes and nutrition tool, and was responsible for conceptualisation, literature search, systematic analysis and drafting the manuscript. J.J.V., L.V. and A.V.P. contributed to revisions and have read and approved the final manuscript.

Supplementary material

For supplementary materials accompanying this article visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980020000725

References

Triunfo, S & Lanzone, A (2015) Impact of maternal under nutrition on obstetric outcomes. J Endocrinol Invest 38, 3138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolf, HT, Hegaard, HK, Huusom, LDet al. (2017) Multivitamin use and adverse birth outcomes in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 217, 404.e1–404.e30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keats, EC, Haider, BA, Tam, Eet al. (2019) Multiple‐micronutrient supplementation for women during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 3, CD004905.Google ScholarPubMed
Abu-Saad, K & Fraser, D (2010) Maternal nutrition and birth outcomes. Epidemiol Rev 32, 525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhutta, Z, Das, JK, Rizvi, Aet al. (2013) Evidence-Based interventions for improvement of maternal and child nutrition: what can be done and at what cost? Lancet 382, 452477.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, S, Wojdyla, D, Say, Let al. (2010) The worldwide incidence of preterm birth: a systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity. Bull World Health 88, 3138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kavle, JA & Landry, M (2018) Addressing barriers to maternal nutrition in low- and middle-income countries: a review of the evidence and programme implications. Matern Child Nutr 14, e12508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
International Food Policy Research Institute (2015) Global Nutrition Report 2014: Actions and Accountability to Accelerate the World’s Progress on Nutrition. J Nutr 145, 663–671.Google Scholar
Lassi, ZS, Salam, RA, Haider, BAet al. (2013) Folic acid supplementation during pregnancy for maternal health and pregnancy outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 3, CD006896.Google ScholarPubMed
Peña-Rosas, JP, De-Regil, LM, Garcia-Casal, MNet al. (2015) Daily oral iron supplementation during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 7, CD004736.Google ScholarPubMed
Ota, E, Mori, R, Middleton, Pet al. (2015) Zinc supplementation for improving pregnancy and infant outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 2, CD000230.Google ScholarPubMed
Buppasiri, P, Lumbiganon, P, Thinkhamrop, Jet al. (2015) Calcium supplementation (other than for preventing or treating hypertension) for improving pregnancy and infant outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 2, CD007079.Google ScholarPubMed
Harding, KB, Peña-Rosas, JP, Webster, ACet al. (2017) Iodine supplementation for women during the preconception, pregnancy and postpartum period. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 3, CD011761.Google ScholarPubMed
De-Regil, LM, Palacios, C, Lombardo, LKet al. (2016) Vitamin D supplementation for women during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev issue 1, CD008873.Google ScholarPubMed
Department of Health (2018) Clinical Practice Guidelines: Pregnancy Care. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
RANZCOG (2015) Vitamin and Mineral Supplementation in Pregnancy (C-Obs 25). Melbourne: Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.Google Scholar
World Health Organisation (2016) WHO Recommendations on Antenatal Care for a Positive Pregnancy Experience. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Boren, SA & Moxley, D (2015) Systematically reviewing the literature: building the evidence for health care quality. Mo Med 112, 5862.Google ScholarPubMed
Pickering, C & Byrne, J (2014) The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early-career researchers. High Educ Res Dev 33, 534548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moher, D, Liberati, A, Tetzlaff, Jet al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151, 264269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakefield, A (2015) Synthesising the literature as part of a literature review. Nurs Stand 29, 4451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittemore, R & Knafl, K (2005) The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs 52, 546553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(2019) World Bank Country and Lending Groups. Available at https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups (accessed May 2019).Google Scholar
Alwan, N, Greenwood, D, Simpson, Net al. (2010) The relationship between dietary supplement use in late pregnancy and birth outcomes: a cohort study in British women. BJOG 117, 821829.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brough, L, Rees, GA, Crawford, MAet al. (2010) Effect of multiple-micronutrient supplementation on maternal nutrient status, infant birth weight and gestational age at birth in a low-income, multi-ethnic population. Br J Nutr 104, 437445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, SE, Colombo, J, Gajewski, BJet al. (2013) DHA supplementation and pregnancy outcomes. Am J Clin Nutr 97, 808815.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Catov, JM, Bodnar, LM, Olsen, Jet al. (2011) Periconceptional multivitamin use and risk of preterm or small-for-gestational-age births in the Danish National Birth Cohort1–4. Am J Clin Nutr 94, 906912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Catov, JM, Nohr, EA, Bodnar, LMet al. (2009) Association of periconceptional multivitamin use with reduced risk of preeclampsia among normal-weight women in the Danish National Birth Cohort. Am J Epidemiol 169, 13041311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chan, KKL, Chan, BCP, Lam, KFet al. (2009) Iron supplement in pregnancy and development of gestational diabetes – a randomised placebo-controlled trial. BJOG 116, 789798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Czeizel, AE, Puhó, EH, Langmar, Zet al. (2009) Possible association of folic acid supplementation during pregnancy with reduction of preterm birth: a population-based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 148, 135140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haugen, M, Brantsæter, AL, Trogstad, Let al. (2009) Vitamin D supplementation and reduced risk of preeclampsia in nulliparous women. Epidemiology 20, 720726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hauth, JC, Clifton, RG, Roberts, JMet al. (2010) Vitamin C and E supplementation to prevent spontaneous preterm birth: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 116, 653658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinussen, MP, Bracken, MB, Triche, EWet al. (2015) Folic acid supplementation in early pregnancy and the risk of preeclampsia, small for gestational age offspring and preterm delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 195, 9499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAlpine, JM, Scott, R, Scuffham, PAet al. (2015) The association between third trimester multivitamin/mineral supplements and gestational length in uncomplicated pregnancies. Women Birth 29, 4146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nilsen, RM, Vollset, SE, Monsen, ALBet al. (2010) Infant birth size is not associated with maternal intake and status of folate during the second trimester in Norwegian pregnant women. J Nutr 140, 572579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papadopoulou, E, Stratakis, N, Roumeliotaki, Tet al. (2013) The effect of high doses of folic acid and iron supplementation in early-to-mid pregnancy on prematurity and fetal growth retardation: the mother–child cohort study in Crete, Greece (Rhea study). Eur J Nutr 52, 327336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pastor-Valero, M, Navarrete-Muñoz, EM, Rebagliato, Met al. (2011) Periconceptional folic acid supplementation and anthropometric measures at birth in a cohort of pregnant women in Valencia, Spain. Br J Nutr 105, 13521360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, JM, Myatt, L, Spong, CYet al. (2010) Vitamins C and E to prevent complications of pregnancy-associated hypertension. N Engl J Med 362, 12821291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermans, S, Jaddoe, VWV, Hofman, Aet al. (2009) Periconception folic acid supplementation, fetal growth and the risks of low birth weight and preterm birth: the Generation R Study. Br J Nutr 102, 777785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vanderlelie, J, Scott, R, Shibl, Ret al. (2016) First trimester multivitamin/mineral use is associated with reduced risk of pre-eclampsia among overweight and obese women. Matern Child Nutr 12, 339348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moher, D, Liberati, A, Tetzlaff, Jet al. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6, e1000097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harvey, NC, Holroyd, C, Ntani, Get al. (2014) Vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 18, 1190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hess, SY & King, JC (2009) Effects of maternal zinc supplementation on pregnancy and lactation outcomes. Food Nutr Bull 30, S60S78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgetts, VA, Morris, RK, Francis, Aet al. (2015) Effectiveness of folic acid supplementation in pregnancy on reducing the risk of small-for-gestational age neonates: a population study, systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 122, 478490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hovdenak, N & Haram, K (2012) Influence of mineral and vitamin supplements on pregnancy outcome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 164, 127132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imdad, A & Bhutta, ZA (2012) Effects of calcium supplementation during pregnancy on maternal, fetal and birth outcomes. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, 138152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imdad, A & Bhutta, ZA (2012) Routine iron/folate supplementation during pregnancy: effect on maternal anaemia and birth outcomes. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, 168177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pérez-López, FR, Pasupuleti, V, Mezones-Holguin, Eet al. (2015) Effect of vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fertil Steril 103, 12781288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramakrishnan, U, Grant, FK, Goldenberg, Tet al. (2012) Effect of multiple micronutrient supplementation on pregnancy and infant outcomes: a systematic review. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, 153167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholl, TO (2011) Maternal iron status: relation to fetal growth, length of gestation, and iron endowment of the neonate. Nutr Rev 69, S23S29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, PS & Ohlsson, A (2009) Effects of prenatal multimicronutrient supplementation on pregnancy outcomes: a meta-analysis. CMAJ 180, E99E108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stephenson, J, Heslehurst, N, Hall, Jet al. (2018) Before the beginning: nutrition and lifestyle in the preconception period and its importance for future health. Lancet 391, 18301841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorne-Lyman, A & Fawzi, WW (2012) Vitamin D during pregnancy and maternal, neonatal and infant health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, 7590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wen, SW, White, RR, Rybak, Net al. (2018) Effect of high dose folic acid supplementation in pregnancy on pre-eclampsia (FACT): double blind, phase III, randomised controlled, international, multicentre trial. BMJ 362, k3478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wen, SW, Guo, Y, Rodger, Met al. (2016) Folic acid supplementation in pregnancy and the risk of pre-eclampsia-A cohort study. PLoS ONE 11, e0149818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, CL, McNeil, RB, Johnson, DDet al. (2013) Health characteristics and outcomes of two randomized vitamin D supplementation trials during pregnancy: a combined analysis. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 136, 313320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dror, DK & Allen, LH (2012) Interventions with vitamins B6, B12 and C in pregnancy. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, 5574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fekete, K, Berti, C, Trovato, Met al. (2012) Effect of folate intake on health outcomes in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis on birth weight, placental weight and length of gestation. Nutr J 11, 75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berti, C, Biesalski, HK, Gärtner, Ret al. (2011) Micronutrients in pregnancy: current knowledge and unresolved questions. Clin Nutr 30, 689701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bo, SMD, Menato, GMD, Villois, Pet al. (2009) Iron supplementation and gestational diabetes in midpregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 201, 158.e151158.e156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cantor, AG, Bougatsos, C, Dana, Tet al. (2015) Routine iron supplementation and screening for iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 162, 566576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaffee, BW & King, JC (2012) Effect of zinc supplementation on pregnancy and infant outcomes: a systematic review. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 26, 118137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curtis, EM, Moon, RJ, Harvey, NCet al. (2018) Maternal vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy. Br Med Bull 126, 5777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bánhidy, F, Dakhlaoui, A, Dudás, Iet al. (2011) Birth outcomes of newborns after folic acid supplementation in pregnant women with early and late pre-eclampsia: a population-based study. Adv Prev Med 2011, 127369–127367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haider, BA, Olofin, I, Wang, Met al. (2013) Anaemia, prenatal iron use, and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 346, f3443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haider, BA, Yakoob, MY & Bhutta, ZA (2011) Effect of multiple micronutrient supplementation during pregnancy on maternal and birth outcomes. BMC Public Health 11, S19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, H, Perez-Cuevas, R, Xiong, Xet al. (2010) An international trial of antioxidants in the prevention of preeclampsia (INTAPP). Am J Obstet Gynecol 202, 239.e231–239.e210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nohr, EA, Frydenberg, M, Henriksen, TBet al. (2006) Does low participation in Cohort studies induce bias? Epidemiology 17, 413418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magnus, P, Irgens, LM, Haug, Ket al. (2006) Cohort profile: the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). Int J Epidemiol 35, 11461150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cameron, CM, Scuffham, PA, Spinks, Aet al. (2012) Environments for Healthy Living (EFHL) Griffith Birth Cohort Study: background and methods. Matern Child Health J 16, 18961905.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nohr, EA & Liew, Z (2018) How to investigate and adjust for selection bias in cohort studies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 97, 407416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mai, CT, Isenburg, J, Langlois, PHet al. (2015) Population-based birth defects data in the United States, 2008 to 2012: presentation of state-specific data and descriptive brief on variability of prevalence: population-based Birth Defects Data. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 103, 972993.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanson, M, Bhutta, ZA, Dain, Ket al. (2018) Intergenerational burden and risks of NCDs: need to promote maternal and child health. Lancet 392, 24222423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Firoz, T, McCaw-Binns, A, Filippi, Vet al. (2018) A framework for healthcare interventions to address maternal morbidity. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 141, 6168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maskileyson, D (2019) Health trajectories of immigrants in the United States: does income inequality of country of origin matter? Soc Sci Med 230, 246255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erten, EY, Van Den Berg, P & Weissing, FJ (2018) Acculturation orientations affect the evolution of a multicultural society. Nat Commun 9, 58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaughan, C, Jarallah, Y, Murdolo, Aet al. (2019) The MuSeS project: a mixed methods study to increase understanding of the role of settlement and multicultural services in supporting migrant and refugee women experiencing violence in Australia. BMC Int Health Hum Rights 19, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, P, Schubert, L & Whittaker, A (2017) The food-health-culture interface: dietary practices of south Indian migrants in Brisbane, Australia. Ann Nutr Metab 71, 1242.Google Scholar
Marinello, V, Buckton, C & Combet, E (2016) Harmless? Mixed perception and awareness of vitamin and mineral supplements. Proc Nutr Soc 75, E66E66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisonkova, S, Sabr, Y, Mayer, Cet al. (2014) Maternal morbidity associated with early-onset and late-onset preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 124(4), 771781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conde-Agudelo, A & Díaz-Rossello, JL (2016) Kangaroo mother care to reduce morbidity and mortality in low birthweight infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, CD002771.Google ScholarPubMed
de Vries, BS, Barratt, A, McGeechan, Ket al. (2018) Outcomes of induction of labour in nulliparous women at 38 to 39 weeks pregnancy by clinical indication: An observational study. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 59, 484492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, R (2015) Aging and the placenta. Placenta 36, A2A2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, N & Gan, JH (2017) Prolonged pregnancy. Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med 27, 311315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, M, Guo, D, Gu, Het al. (2016) Selenium and preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biol Trace Elem Res 171, 283292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ventura, M, Melo, M & Carrilho, F (2017) Selenium and thyroid disease: from pathophysiology to treatment. Int J Endocrinol 2017, 12976581297659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garrett, GS & Bailey, LB (2018) A public health approach for preventing neural tube defects: folic acid fortification and beyond: preventing NTDs: folic acid fortification. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1414, 4758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BioMedReports (2017) Prenatal Vitamin Supplements Market: Global Industry Analysis, Trends, Market Size & Forecasts to 2023 - Research and Markets. New York: Newstex Trade and Industry Blogs.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1 PRISMA flow diagram(41)

Figure 1

Table 1 List of papers included in this review

Figure 2

Table 2 Number of studies and effects by outcomes

Supplementary material: File

James-McAlpine et al. supplementary material

James-McAlpine et al. supplementary material 1

Download James-McAlpine et al. supplementary material(File)
File 20.8 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

James-McAlpine et al. supplementary material

James-McAlpine et al. supplementary material 2

Download James-McAlpine et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 49.4 KB