Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This trial of over 2800 infants found that faster daily feed increments of 30 ml/kg or 18 ml/kg did not increase survival without moderate or severe neurodevelopmental disability at 24 months.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Jon Dorling 1,*, Oliver Hewer 2, Madeleine Hurd 2, Vasha Bari 2, Beth Bosiak 3, Ursula Bowler 2, Andrew King 2, Louise Linsell 2, David Murray 2, Omar Omar 4, Christopher Partlett 5, Catherine Rounding 2, John Townend 2, Jane Abbott 6, Janet Berrington 7, Elaine Boyle 8, Nicholas Embleton 7, Samantha Johnson 8, Alison Leaf 9, Kenny McCormick 10, William McGuire 11, Mehali Patel 6, Tracy Roberts 12, Ben Stenson 13, Warda Tahir 12, Mark Monahan 12, Judy Richards 14, Judith Rankin 14, Edmund Juszczak 2

1 Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
2 National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
3 Women’s College Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
4 Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
5 Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
6 Bliss, London, UK
7 Newcastle Neonatal Service, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
8 Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
9 National Institute for Health Research Southampton Biomedical Research Centre Department of Child Health, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
10 John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
11 Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
12 School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
13 The Simpson Centre for Reproductive Health, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
14 Institute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
* Corresponding author Email:

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} . {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.


Responses to this report

No responses have been published.


If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions