Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:41:12.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Demographic and health characteristics associated with fish and n-3 fatty acid supplement intake during pregnancy: results from pregnancy cohorts in the ECHO programme

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2024

Emily Oken*
Affiliation:
Division of Chronic Disease research across the Lifecourse, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, 401 Park Drive, Suite 401 East, Boston, MA, USA
Rashelle J Musci
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
Matthew Westlake
Affiliation:
RTI International, Raleigh, NC, USA
Kennedy Gachigi
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
Judy L Aschner
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, Joseph M. Sanzari Children’s Hospital, Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, Nutley, NJ, USA Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
Kathrine L Barnes
Affiliation:
Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, WI, USA
Theresa M Bastain
Affiliation:
Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Claudia Buss
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Psychology, Charité University of Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany Development, Health, Disease Research Program, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA
Carlos A Camargo Jr
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Jose F Cordero
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA
Dana Dabelea
Affiliation:
Lifecourse Epidemiology of Adiposity and Diabetes (LEAD) Center, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
Anne L Dunlop
Affiliation:
Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
Akhgar Ghassabian
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
Alison E Hipwell
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Christine W Hockett
Affiliation:
Avera Research Institute, Sioux Falls, SD, USA
Margaret R Karagas
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, USA
Claudia Lugo-Candelas
Affiliation:
New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
Amy E Margolis
Affiliation:
Columbia University Irving Medical center, New York, NY, USA
Thomas G O’Connor
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychiatry, Psychology, Neuroscience, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA
Coral L Shuster
Affiliation:
Brown Center for the Study of Children at Risk, Women and Infants Hospital, Providence, RI, USA
Jennifer K Straughen
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA
Kristen Lyall
Affiliation:
AJ Drexel Autism Institute, Philadelphia, PA, USA
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

n-3 fatty acid consumption during pregnancy is recommended for optimal pregnancy outcomes and offspring health. We examined characteristics associated with self-reported fish or n-3 supplement intake.

Design:

Pooled pregnancy cohort studies.

Setting:

Cohorts participating in the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) consortium with births from 1999 to 2020.

Participants:

A total of 10 800 pregnant women in twenty-three cohorts with food frequency data on fish consumption; 12 646 from thirty-five cohorts with information on supplement use.

Results:

Overall, 24·6 % reported consuming fish never or less than once per month, 40·1 % less than once a week, 22·1 % 1–2 times per week and 13·2 % more than twice per week. The relative risk (RR) of ever (v. never) consuming fish was higher in participants who were older (1·14, 95 % CI 1·10, 1·18 for 35–40 v. <29 years), were other than non-Hispanic White (1·13, 95 % CI 1·08, 1·18 for non-Hispanic Black; 1·05, 95 % CI 1·01, 1·10 for non-Hispanic Asian; 1·06, 95 % CI 1·02, 1·10 for Hispanic) or used tobacco (1·04, 95 % CI 1·01, 1·08). The RR was lower in those with overweight v. healthy weight (0·97, 95 % CI 0·95, 1·0). Only 16·2 % reported n-3 supplement use, which was more common among individuals with a higher age and education, a lower BMI, and fish consumption (RR 1·5, 95 % CI 1·23, 1·82 for twice-weekly v. never).

Conclusions:

One-quarter of participants in this large nationwide dataset rarely or never consumed fish during pregnancy, and n-3 supplement use was uncommon, even among those who did not consume fish.

Type
Short Communication
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

n-3 PUFA are essential nutrients. Adequate consumption is vital in pregnancy, as n-3 PUFA, in particular long-chain DHA, contribute to offspring neurodevelopment and may improve pregnancy outcomes, including risk for preterm birth(Reference Middleton, Gomersall and Gould1). Fish and other seafood (hereafter ‘fish’) are the main dietary source of long-chain n-3 PUFA. Therefore, current guidance recommends intake of 8–12 ounces (224–336 g, or 2–3 servings) of fish per week during pregnancy(2,3) , with the goal of consuming an average of 200 mg/d of DHA(Reference Koletzko, Cetin and Brenna4).

Limited research suggests that few pregnant women consume the recommended amounts of fish or n-3 PUFA. The latest US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) assessment of dietary fish intake was conducted in 2014 and relied on data sources by then already decades old(5). In the 2004 Infant Feeding Practices Study II, the median intake of total fish by pregnant participants, excluding non-fish consumers, was 1·8 ounces/week (about 1 serving per month)(Reference Lando, Fein and Choinière6). In the 2013 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), mean fish intake by pregnant women was 4·6 servings a month(Reference Thompson, Hein and Hanson7).

Additionally, studies suggest that fish and n-3 PUFA intake during pregnancy has been declining over past decades, likely in response to federal advisories about mercury in fish since 2001(Reference Oken, Kleinman and Berland8,Reference Shimshack and Ward9) . In the NHANES survey, mean DHA intake among women of childbearing age decreased from 56 mg/d in 2003–2004 to 42 mg/d in 2011–2012(Reference Nordgren, Lyden and Anderson-Berry10). Intake was highest in women who were non-Hispanic White and had higher education and income levels, similar to demographic patterns in non-population-based cohorts(Reference Donahue, Rifas-Shiman and Olsen11,Reference Oken, Østerdal and Gillman12) . Despite the importance of fish consumption during pregnancy, women consume substantially less than men and do not increase intake during pregnancy(Reference Thompson, Hein and Hanson7,Reference Nordgren, Lyden and Anderson-Berry10,Reference Murphy, Devarshi and Ekimura13) .

Most experts believe that fish consumption is the optimal way to meet recommendations for adequate n-3 PUFA intake(Reference Kris-Etherton and Innis14), in part because experimental evidence has not supported offspring developmental benefits of supplementation(Reference Nevins, Donovan and Snetselaar15,Reference Gould, Roberts and Makrides16) . For those who cannot or choose not to eat fish, n-3 PUFA supplements are recommended(Reference Adams, Kirby and Sorensen17). The extent to which pregnant women take n-3 PUFA supplements is not well described. In addition, it is unclear whether supplement use is more common in those with low fish intake. In the 2003–2012 NHANES surveys, only 9 % of pregnant women consumed an n-3 PUFA supplement, but this information was not presented according to year of pregnancy or by fish intake(Reference Nordgren, Lyden and Anderson-Berry10).

We examined data from the National Institutes of Health Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) programme(Reference LeWinn, Caretta and Davis18,Reference Knapp, Kress and Parker19) to address our hypotheses that fish consumption would have declined over the past two decades and that supplement use would be more common among those who did not eat fish.

Methods

Study design, sample and measures

In October 2022, the ECHO data platform included information on more than 52 000 singleton pregnancies from sixty-nine cohorts across the USA and Puerto Rico (see online supplementary material, Supplementary Figure 1). We included data from twenty-three cohorts that collected information on fish intake during pregnancy and thirty-five that collected supplement intake during pregnancy. Within cohorts, pregnancies were included if they had information on either fish intake or supplement use.

Assessment of fish and supplement intake

We performed a keyword search and form review for FFQ that assessed fish intake and any questionnaires that assessed supplement intake. For fish intake, we converted relevant questionnaire items and summed as appropriate to weekly total intake. We then constructed a four-level categorical variable: (1) never or less than once per month, (2) once per month to less than once per week, (3) one to two times per week and (4) more than twice per week. Additionally, we created a binary variable of never or less than once per month (which we summarise as ‘never’) v. more (‘ever’). For supplements, we created a binary variable to indicate any (v. no) use of supplements with fish oil or n-3 fatty acids.

Assessment of other characteristics

We captured other variables of interest from harmonised derived tables of maternal self-reported sociodemographic characteristics, including age, race, ethnicity, education, tobacco or nicotine use during pregnancy (Y/N), and pre-pregnancy BMI, each of which we categorised as in Table 1.

Table 1 Characteristics of 10 800 ECHO-wide cohort participants with information on fish consumption during pregnancy

ECHO, Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes; GED, General Educational Development; BA, Bachelor of Arts; BS, Bachelor of Science.

* Results from dataset with missing values imputed using multiple imputation for age (n 1049, 9·7 %), race/ethnicity (n 586, 5·4 %), education (n 1048, 9·7 %), pre-pregnancy BMI (n 2525, 23·4 %), and tobacco or nicotine use (n 2650, 24·5 %).

Relative risk from regression model, including all covariates in the table, with missing values imputed using multiple imputation.

Statistical analysis

We performed multiple imputation (n 25 imputations) using SAS Proc MI to fill in missing data on covariates of interest. We then performed a log-binomial regression analysis, mutually adjusted for measured demographic characteristics (as in Table 1), smoking status and pre-pregnancy BMI. We included a random effect for cohort to account for the nested nature of the pooled data and conducted leave-one-cohort-out analyses to confirm that no cohort explained the overall associations. Additionally, we included the number of fish questions asked on the dietary questionnaire (1 or more than 1) given our prior research that found that asking more questions leads to a higher estimate of fish intake(Reference Oken, Guthrie and Bloomingdale20). Income was not significantly associated with either outcome and including it did not substantially alter any other estimates; therefore, we did not include it in our final models.

Results

Among 10 800 pregnant women with information on fish consumption, 24·6 % reported never consuming fish and 75·4 % reported ever consuming fish during pregnancy (Table 1): 40·1 % less than 1 serving per week, 22·1 % 1–2 servings per week and 13·2 % more than 2 servings per week (see online supplementary material, Supplemental Table 1). In the multivariable regression analyses with imputed missing covariates (Table 1), the likelihood of ever (v. never) consuming fish during pregnancy remained higher in those who were older (relative risk (RR) 1·14, 95 % CI 1·10, 1·18 for >40 v. <29 years), were other than non-Hispanic White (RR 1·13, 95 % CI 1·08, 1·18 for non-Hispanic Black; 1·05, 95 % CI 1·01, 1·10 for non-Hispanic Asian; 1·06, 95 % CI 1·02, 1·10 for Hispanic), had lower BMI (RR 0·97, 95 % CI 0·95, 1·0 for overweight v. normal BMI), and used tobacco or nicotine products (RR 1·04, 95 % CI 1·01, 1·08). After accounting for demographics and the number of fish questions included on the different dietary questionnaires, no differences in fish intake were observed by year of delivery.

Among 12 646 pregnant women with information on n-3 PUFA supplement intake, 16·2 % reported any supplement use. Supplement use was uncommon before 2005 (less than 0·05 %), but not substantially different afterwards. In multivariable regression analyses (Table 2), supplement use was more likely at an older age and a higher level of education: those over 40 years of age were about twice as likely to use supplements than those less than 29 years of age (RR 2·01, 95 % CI 1·35, 3·00) and those with a graduate degree were more likely to use supplements than those with less than a high school education (RR 1·71, 95 % CI 1·21, 2·41). Supplement use was less likely among non-Hispanic Black (RR 0·61, 95 % CI 0·48, 0·76) and Hispanic (RR 0·67, 95 % CI 0·55, 0·80) participants compared with non-Hispanic White participants, those who used tobacco or nicotine products (RR 0·81, 95 % CI 0·68, 0·98) and those with a higher BMI (RR 0·79, 95 % CI 0·68, 0·90 for BMI ≥ 30 v. <25 kg/m2). In contrast to the advice that those who do not consume fish should take an n-3 fatty acid supplement, supplement use was highest among those with greater fish consumption (Table 2 and Fig. 1).

Table 2 Characteristics of 12 646 ECHO-wide cohort participants with information on n-3 fatty acid supplement consumption during pregnancy

ECHO, Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes; GED, General Educational Development; BA, Bachelor of Arts; BS, Bachelor of Science.

* Results from dataset with missing values imputed using multiple imputation for age (n 966, 7·6 %), race/ethnicity (n 338, 2·7 %), education (n 468, 3·7 %), pre-pregnancy BMI (n 2351, 18·6 %), and tobacco or nicotine use (n 1229, 9·7 %).

Relative risk from regression model, including all covariates in the table, with missing values imputed using multiple imputation.

Fig. 1 Likelihood of n-3 polyunsaturated supplement use in pregnancy according to fish consumption during pregnancy within the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) cohort

Discussion

A large number of observational studies and some randomised trials have examined associations of total prenatal fish or n-3 PUFA intake with a range of outcomes(Reference Oken21). Expert opinion has coalesced around the benefits of regular fish or supplement consumption to achieve an intake of at least 500 mg/d of long-chain n-3 PUFA (including 200 mg/d of DHA)(Reference Makrides22). Using data from over 10 000 pregnancies across the USA occurring from 1999 through 2020, we observed that almost a quarter of women reported never consuming fish, and only 16 % consumed any n-3 fatty acid supplements. Additionally, fish intake correlated with demographic and health characteristics, albeit somewhat less strongly and not entirely similar to supplement use. Similar to supplement use, fish intake was higher in those who were older and had a higher income and education, but different from supplements, fish intake was higher in those with racial/ethnic identities other than non-Hispanic White and in those who used tobacco and nicotine products. Supplement intake tracked even more strongly with demographics, with the highest likelihood of intake among those who were older, had a higher education and income, and were non-Hispanic White or Asian. Additionally, supplement use was less common among those at higher risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes as a function of using tobacco or nicotine products or having a higher BMI.

Limited recent information is available about fish intake in US pregnancies, yet such estimates are essential for efforts to model health risks and benefits from nutrients and contaminants commonly found in fish. For example, in the most recent FDA assessment of the net effects of eating commercial fish on fetal neurodevelopment, which was conducted in 2014, the FDA estimated the types and amount of fish that people eat(5). This estimation was based on three sources of data that were collected about 15, about 20 and about 30 years ago: National Marine Fisheries Service market share data on consumable commercial fish from 2007, NHANES data from 1999 to 2000, and US Department of Agriculture’s Continuing Survey of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) data from 1989 to 1991. With these data, the FDA estimated that women of childbearing age in the USA consumed a mean of 3·7 and a median of 1·9 ounces of fish per week. It is notable that this model was based entirely on dietary data from non-pregnant persons and assumed that pregnant women eat a similar amount, despite evidence that women consume less fish during pregnancy(Reference Lando, Fein and Choinière6,Reference Bloomingdale, Guthrie and Price23) . Further, fish consumption in women of childbearing age may have decreased since these data were collected(Reference Oken, Kleinman and Berland8,Reference Shimshack and Ward9) .

Evidence to support routine n-3 supplementation in pregnancy has not been entirely consistent(Reference Middleton, Gomersall and Gould1,Reference Saccone, Saccone and Berghella24) . Nevertheless, those with low baseline fish intake or n-3 PUFA status(Reference Bisgaard, Stokholm and Chawes25,Reference Simmonds, Sullivan and Skubisz26) or a BMI that indicates obesity(Reference Rasool, Alvarado-Flores and O’Tierney-Ginn27,Reference Satokar, Cutfield and Cameron-Smith28) may particularly benefit from supplementation. We did not observe that supplement use was more common in those with low fish intake or a high BMI, but rather the opposite. In another study of ECHO participants, more than 99 % of the sample reported use of vitamins and minerals containing supplements during pregnancy, but that analysis did not include n-3 PUFA supplements(Reference Sauder, Harte and Ringham29). In contrast to vitamin and mineral supplement use, which abated most nutrient risk disparities from diet alone, we found that n-3 PUFA supplement use was less common among those who did not eat fish.

The large sample size is a strength, and we included data from over the past two decades up to 2020. In contrast, published NHANES analyses include about 1,000 pregnancies and a decade of data extending to 2015. Limitations include our inability to assess specific fish types, given the varied dietary assessment instruments used across cohorts, or to assign intake by trimester. However, most prior studies have examined total fish intake, and current US guidelines recommend total fish intake rather than specific subtypes such as ‘fatty’ fish(2). Also, although different studies administered different questionnaires, we accounted for the number of questions asked about fish. Additionally, we do not have information on supplement dose. Both fish and supplement intake were self-reported, as is typical in studies of usual diet, and reporting may have been biased.

The ECHO population is nationwide but not necessarily nationally representative(Reference Knapp, Kress and Parker19), as it draws upon individuals who elected to enrol in cohorts and who may be more health conscious than the general population. The very low fish and n-3 PUFA supplement intake we observed may overestimate actual use in all US pregnancies, as more health-conscious persons may consume more fish and supplements, or alternatively, it may be that more health-conscious persons try to avoid mercury exposure from fish. Our results are especially timely given that both the WHO and US National Academies are currently evaluating the evidence on fish intake in pregnancy(30,31) . Ongoing effective public health advice and resources to support clinicians(Reference Judge, Lucas and Kuzoian32,Reference Ziegenfuss, Dinh and McCann33) are needed to encourage consumption of low-mercury fish during pregnancy and intake of n-3 supplements among those who do not consume fish.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the unique contributions of Zhumin Zhang, MS, PhD, University of Wisconsin-Madison, to this study, which included investigation, resources, supervision and funding acquisition.

The authors wish to thank our ECHO colleagues; the medical, nursing and programme staff; and the children and families participating in the ECHO cohorts. We also acknowledge the contribution of the following ECHO programme collaborators:

ECHO components

Coordinating Center: Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina: Smith PB, Newby KL; Data Analysis Center: Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland: Jacobson LP; Research Triangle Institute, Durham, North Carolina: Catellier DJ; Person-Reported Outcomes Core: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois: Gershon R, Cella D.

ECHO awardees and cohorts

Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts: Alshawabkeh, AN; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY: Teitelbaum SL; Stroustrup A; Cohen Children’s Medical Center, Northwell Health: Stroustrup A; Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence RI: Koinis Mitchell D, Deoni S; New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY: Duarte C; University of Puerto Rico, San Juan, PR: Canino G; Avera Health Rapid City, Rapid City, sd: Elliott A; Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, Oakland, CA: Ferrara A; University of Wisconsin, Madison WI: Gern J; Henry Ford Health System:, Detroit, MI: Zoratti E; Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO: Rivera-Spoljaric K; University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI: Singh A; Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN: Hartert T; University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA: Breton C; Farzan S; Habre R; University of California Davis Mind Institute, Sacramento, CA: Hertz-Picciotto I; University of Washington, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, Seattle, WA: Karr C; University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN: Mason A; Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA: Weiss S; Boston University Medical Center, Boston, MA: O’Connor G; Kaiser Permanente, Southern California, San Diego, CA: Zeiger R; Washington University of St. Louis, St Louis, MO: Bacharier L; University of California, UC Davis Medical Center Mind Institute, Davis, CA: Schmidt R; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health: Volk H; Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research: Croen L; Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY: Herbstman J; University of Illinois, Beckman Institute, Urbana, IL: Schantz S; University of California, San Francisco:, San Francisco, CA: Woodruff T; New York School of Medicine, New York, NY: Trasande L; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY: Wright R; Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston MA: Bosquet-Enlow M.

Disclaimer

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Financial support

Research reported in this publication was supported by the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) programme, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, under Award Numbers U2COD023375 (Coordinating Center), U24OD023382 (Data Analysis Center), U24OD023319 with co-funding from the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research (PRO Core), UH3OD023251 (Alshawabkeh), UH3OD023320 (Aschner), UH3OD023253 (Camargo), UH3OD023248 (Dabelea), UH3OD023313 (Koinis-Mitchell), UH3OD023328 (Duarte), UH3OD023318 (Dunlop), UH3OD023279 (Elliott), UH3OD023289 (Ferrara), UH3OD023282 (Gern), UH3OD023287 (Breton), UH3OD023365 (Hertz-Picciotto), UH3OD023244 (Hipwell), UH3OD023275 (Karagas), UH3OD023271 (Karr), UH3OD023347 (Lester), UH3OD023268 (Weiss), UH3OD023342 (Lyall), UH3OD023349 (O’Connor), UH3OD023286 (Oken), UH3OD023285 (Kerver), UH3OD023290 (Herbstman), UH3OD023272 (Schantz), UH3OD023305 (Trasande), UH3OD023337 (Wright).

Conflict of interest

None of the authors reports a conflict of interest.

Authorship

Conceptualisation: Oken, Lyall, Musci and Westlake. Methodology: Oken, Lyall, Musci, Westlake and Gachigi. Software: Westlake and Gachigi. Validation: Musci, Westlake and Gachigi. Formal analysis: Musci, Westlake and Gachigi. Investigation: Oken, Aschner, Barnes, Bastain, Buss, Camargo, Cordero, Dabelea, Dunlop, Ghassabian, Hipwell, Hockett, Karagas, Lugo-Candelas, Margolis, O’Connor, Shuster, Straughen and Lyall. Resources: Oken, Aschner, Barnes, Bastain, Buss, Camargo, Cordero, Dabelea, Dunlop, Ghassabian, Hipwell, Hockett, Karagas, Lugo-Candelas, Margolis, O’Connor, Shuster, Straughen and Lyall. Data Curation: Westlake. Writing, Original Draft: Oken. Writing, Review and Editing: All. Visualisation: Oken. Supervision: Oken, Aschner, Barnes, Bastain, Buss, Camargo, Cordero, Dabelea, Dunlop, Ghassabian, Hipwell, Hockett, Karagas, Lugo-Candelas, Margolis, O’Connor, Shuster, Straughen and Lyall. Project Administration: Oken and Lyall. Funding Acquisition: Oken, Aschner, Barnes, Bastain, Buss, Camargo, Cordero, Dabelea, Dunlop, Ghassabian, Hipwell, Hockett, Karagas, Lugo-Candelas, Margolis, O’Connor, Shuster, Straughen, and Lyall.

Ethics of human subject participation

This study was conducted according to the guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki, and participant activities were overseen and approved by both central and site-specific Institutional Review Boards. All participants provided written informed consent.

Supplementary material

For supplementary material accompanying this paper visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S136898002400051X.

References

Middleton, P, Gomersall, JC, Gould, JF et al. (2018) Omega-3 fatty acid addition during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11, CD003402.Google ScholarPubMed
US Food and Drug Administration (2022) Advice about Eating Fish. FDA. https://www.fda.gov/food/consumers/advice-about-eating-fish (accessed July 2022).Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture & US Department of Health and Human Services (2020) Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020–2025. 9th Edition. https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/resources/2020-2025-dietary-guidelines-online-materials (accessed August 2022).Google Scholar
Koletzko, B, Cetin, I, Brenna, JT et al. (2007) Dietary fat intakes for pregnant and lactating women. Br J Nutr 98, 873877.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US Food and Drug Administration (2014) Quantitative Assessment of the Net Effects on Fetal Neurodevelopment from Eating Commercial Fish (as Measured by IQ and Also by Early Age Verbal Development in Children). https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodborneIllnessContaminants/Metals/ucm393211.htm (accessed August 2022).Google Scholar
Lando, AM, Fein, SB & Choinière, CJ (2012) Awareness of methylmercury in fish and fish consumption among pregnant and postpartum women and women of childbearing age in the United States. Environ Res 116, 8592.Google Scholar
Thompson, M, Hein, N, Hanson, C et al. (2019) Omega-3 fatty acid intake by age, gender, and pregnancy status in the United States: national health and nutrition examination survey 20032014. Nutrients 11, E177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oken, E, Kleinman, KP, Berland, WE et al. (2003) Decline in fish consumption among pregnant women after a national mercury advisory. Obstet Gynecol 102, 346351.Google ScholarPubMed
Shimshack, JP & Ward, MB (2010) Mercury advisories and household health trade-offs. J Health Econ 29, 674685.Google Scholar
Nordgren, TM, Lyden, E, Anderson-Berry, A et al. (2017) Omega-3 fatty acid intake of pregnant women and women of childbearing age in the United States: potential for deficiency? Nutrients 9, 197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donahue, SMA, Rifas-Shiman, SL, Olsen, SF et al. (2009) Associations of maternal prenatal dietary intake of n-3 and n-6 fatty acids with maternal and umbilical cord blood levels. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 80, 289296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oken, E, Østerdal, ML, Gillman, MW et al. (2008) Associations of maternal fish intake during pregnancy and breastfeeding duration with attainment of developmental milestones in early childhood: a study from the Danish National Birth Cohort. Am J Clin Nutr 88, 789796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, RA, Devarshi, PP, Ekimura, S et al. (2021) Long-chain omega-3 fatty acid serum concentrations across life stages in the USA: an analysis of NHANES 2011–2012. BMJ Open 11, e043301.Google Scholar
Kris-Etherton, PM, Innis, S, American Dietetic Association & Dietitians of Canada (2007) Position of the American dietetic association and dietitians of Canada: dietary fatty acids. J Am Diet Assoc 107, 15991611.Google ScholarPubMed
Nevins, JEH, Donovan, SM, Snetselaar, L et al. (2021) Omega-3 fatty acid dietary supplements consumed during pregnancy and lactation and child neurodevelopment: a systematic review. J Nutr 151, 34833494.Google Scholar
Gould, JF, Roberts, RM & Makrides, M (2021) The influence of omega-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid, docosahexaenoic acid, on child behavioral functioning: a review of randomized controlled trials of DHA supplementation in pregnancy, the neonatal period and infancy. Nutrients 13, 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, JB, Kirby, JK, Sorensen, JC et al. (2022) Evidence based recommendations for an optimal prenatal supplement for women in the US: vitamins and related nutrients. Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol 8, 4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LeWinn, KZ, Caretta, E, Davis, A et al. (2021) Program collaborators for environmental influences on child health outcomes. SPR perspectives: environmental influences on child health outcomes (ECHO) program: overcoming challenges to generate engaged, multidisciplinary science. Pediatr Res 92, 12621269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knapp, EA, Kress, AM, Parker, CB et al. (2023) The environmental influences on child health outcomes (ECHO)-wide cohort. Am J Epidemiol 192, 12491263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oken, E, Guthrie, LB, Bloomingdale, A et al. (2014) Assessment of dietary fish consumption in pregnancy: comparing one-, four- and thirty-six-item questionnaires. Public Health Nutr 17, 19491959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oken, E (2020) Fresh fish findings?. Am J Clin Nutr 112, 11491150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makrides, M (2019) ω-3 fatty acids in pregnancy: time for action. J Nutr 149, 549550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloomingdale, A, Guthrie, LB, Price, S et al. (2010) A qualitative study of fish consumption during pregnancy. Am J Clin Nutr 92, 12341240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saccone, G, Saccone, I & Berghella, V (2016) Omega-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and fish oil supplementation during pregnancy: which evidence?. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med J Eur Assoc Perinat Med Fed Asia Ocean Perinat Soc Int Soc Perinat Obstet 29, 23892397.Google Scholar
Bisgaard, H, Stokholm, J, Chawes, BL et al. (2016) Fish oil-derived fatty acids in pregnancy and wheeze and asthma in offspring. N Engl J Med 375, 25302539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simmonds, LA, Sullivan, TR, Skubisz, M et al. (2020) Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in pregnancy-baseline omega-3 status and early preterm birth: exploratory analysis of a randomised controlled trial. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol 127, 975981.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rasool, A, Alvarado-Flores, F & O’Tierney-Ginn, P (2021) Placental impact of dietary supplements: more than micronutrients. Clin Ther 43, 226245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Satokar, VV, Cutfield, WS, Cameron-Smith, D et al. (2021) Omega-3 fats in pregnancy: could a targeted approach lead to better metabolic health for children?. Nutr Rev 79, 574584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sauder, KA, Harte, RN, Ringham, BM et al. (2021) Disparities in risks of inadequate and excessive intake of micronutrients during pregnancy. J Nutr 151, 35553569.Google Scholar
WHO (2023) Call for experts for Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on the Risks and Benefits of Fish Consumption. https://www.who.int/news-room/articles-detail/call-for-experts-for-joint-fao-who-expert-consultation-on-the-risks-and-benefits-of-fish-consumption (accessed July 2023).Google Scholar
National Academies (2023) The Role of Seafood in Child Growth and Development. https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/the-role-of-seafood-in-child-growth-and-development (accessed July 2023).Google Scholar
Judge, MP, Lucas, R, Kuzoian, C et al. (2021) Needs assessment to inform and improve educational practices surrounding omega-3 consumption during pregnancy. Matern Child Health J 25, 192197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziegenfuss, JY, Dinh, JM, McCann, P et al. (2022) Behaviors, beliefs, and recommendations to optimize promotion of safe fish consumption before and during pregnancy: a physician survey. J Prim Care Community Health 13, 21501319221126980.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1 Characteristics of 10 800 ECHO-wide cohort participants with information on fish consumption during pregnancy

Figure 1

Table 2 Characteristics of 12 646 ECHO-wide cohort participants with information on n-3 fatty acid supplement consumption during pregnancy

Figure 2

Fig. 1 Likelihood of n-3 polyunsaturated supplement use in pregnancy according to fish consumption during pregnancy within the Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) cohort

Supplementary material: File

Oken et al. supplementary material

Oken et al. supplementary material
Download Oken et al. supplementary material(File)
File 42.5 KB