This is a review of randomized controlled trials using docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) interventions in the first 1000 days of life with assessments of behavioral functioning in childhood. Electronic databases were searched for trials with a DHA intervention (compared with a placebo group that received no or less DHA) at any time to either women or infants during the first 1000 days, with a subsequent assessment of child behavior. There were 25 trials involving 10,320 mother–child pairs, and 71 assessments of behavior in 6867 of the children (66.5% of those originally enrolled). From the 71 assessments administered, there were 401 comparisons between a DHA group and a control group, with most reporting a null effect. There were no findings of a positive effect of DHA, and 23 instances where the DHA group had worse scores compared with the control group. There was limited evidence that DHA supplementation had any effect on behavioral development, although two of the largest trials with behavioral measures detected adverse effects. Future trials, and future follow-ups of existing trials, should make an effort to evaluate the effect of DHA intervention on behavioral functioning.

Background: Children born preterm (<37 weeks’ gestation) have an increased risk of poor neurodevelopment, including lower intelligence quotient (IQ) scores compared with their term-born counterparts.Objective: To explore the differences in psychometric scores for cognition and motor skills when they are age-standardized according to chronological age instead of corrected age for children born preterm.Methods: We assessed = 554 children born <33 weeks’ gestation with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 2^ndedition (mental and motor scores) at 18 months and the Weschler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (IQ score) at seven years of age. Scores were standardized according to chronological age and corrected age and differences between mean chronological and corrected scores were compared, along with the proportion of children whose scores could be classified as impaired.Results: When scores were standardized according to chronological age instead of corrected age there was a large significant difference of 17.3 points on the mental scale (79.5 vs. 96.8, respectively) and 11.8 points on the motor scale (84.8 vs. 96.6, respectively) at 18 months. By seven years, the difference in IQ scores remained, although of a smaller magnitude at 1.9 points between mean chronological and corrected age scoring (97.2 vs. 99.1, respectively).Conclusion: Consistent with previous literature, outcome assessments for preterm infants consistently differed according to use of chronological or corrected age to standardized scores. Cognitive scores were impacted more severely than motor scores, and differences were more substantial in early childhood than later in childhood. For clinical purposes, correction for preterm birth is only likely to have an impact during early childhood, however assessments for research purposes should continue to correct into childhood to account for the persistent bias due to preterm birth.

Infants born preterm miss out on the peak period of in utero DHA accretion to the brain during the last trimester of pregnancy which is hypothesised to contribute to the increased prevalence of neurodevelopmental deficits in this population. This study aimed to determine whether DHA supplementation in infants born preterm improves attention at 18 months’ corrected age. This is a follow-up of a subset of infants who participated in the N3RO randomised controlled trial. Infants were randomised to receive an enteral emulsion of high-dose DHA (60 mg/kg per d) or no DHA (soya oil – control) from within the first days of birth until 36 weeks’ post-menstrual age. The assessment of attention involved three tasks requiring the child to maintain attention on toy/s in either the presence or absence of competition or a distractor. The primary outcome was the child’s latency of distractibility when attention was focused on a toy. The primary outcome was available for seventy-three of the 120 infants that were eligible to participate. There was no evidence of a difference between groups in the latency of distractibility (adjusted mean difference: 0·08 s, 95 % CI –0·81, 0·97; P = 0·86). Enteral DHA supplementation did not result in improved attention in infants born preterm at 18 months’ corrected age.

Depression is a common mood disorder associated with childbirth and is hypothesized to be affected by low vitamin D. This systematic review identified two randomized controlled trials (RCT) of vitamin D supplementation for the treatment or prevention of depressive symptoms in the perinatal period, as well as 18 observational studies of vitamin D exposure and depression in the antenatal and postnatal periods. Both RCTs claimed an improvement in depressive symptoms in the vitamin D group, although the sample sizes were too small to draw firm conclusions. The case-control and cohort studies had mixed findings and were limited by study quality. There were inconsistent results within the few studies with a more robust methodology or within samples restricted to women likely to have depression. The current evidence is inconclusive due to the poor quality and heterogeneity of studies, likely contributing to the contradictory findings. Given there are already numerous RCTs of prenatal vitamin D supplementation, we recommend adding an appropriate measure of depression in the perinatal period to assist in resolving the uncertainty.

(1) Background: Despite the postulated importance of choline during pregnancy, little is known about the choline intake of Australians during pregnancy. In this study, we estimated dietary intakes of choline in early and late pregnancy, compared those intakes to recommendations, and investigated food sources of choline in a group of pregnant women in Australia. (2) Methods: 103 pregnant women enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. In early pregnancy (12–16 weeks gestation) and late pregnancy (36 weeks gestation), women completed a food frequency questionnaire designed to assess dietary intake over the previous month. (3) Results: Choline intakes and sources were similar in early and late pregnancy. Median choline intake in early pregnancy was 362 mg/day. Of the women, 39% and 25% had choline intakes above the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) adequate intake (AI) of >440 mg/day and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) AI of >480 mg/day for choline in pregnancy, respectively. Eggs, red meat, nuts, legumes, and dairy accounted for 50% of choline intake, with eggs being the most significant contributor at 17%. (4) Conclusions: Few pregnant women in our study met the AI recommended by the NHMRC and EFSA. In Australia, choline intake in pregnancy may need to be improved, but further work to define choline requirements in pregnancy is required.