CORE/EBOH Seminar Series - February 23, 2026 - Dr. Mireille Guillot

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The presentation provides a comprehensive and balanced overview of the evidence on DHA supplementation in very preterm neonates. It systematically reviews key trials and meta-analyses, highlighting the biological rationale, the conflicting results, and the potential reasons for heterogeneity. The argumentation is well-structured, moving from clinical context to biology, evidence, and future directions. The speaker critically appraises the literature, acknowledging limitations and uncertainties, and avoids overstating benefits. The discussion of the DHA/AA balance adds depth and suggests a nuanced interpretation of the data. The talk is valuable for clinicians and researchers in neonatology, offering a synthesis of current evidence and identifying knowledge gaps.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The presentation demonstrates scientific rigor by referencing specific trials (MOBYDIK, N3RO, Mega DonOmega) and systematic reviews, and by discussing methodological issues such as outcome harmonization and IPDMA. The speaker discloses funding sources and presents conflicting evidence without bias. The title accurately reflects the content, which is a seminar on the DHA dilemma in preterm neonates. The talk is based on the speaker’s expertise and published literature, but as a seminar, it is not peer-reviewed. The description provides learning objectives and an abstract, but no direct links to sources are given in the description. The presentation’s rigor is high, but the reliance on the speaker’s interpretation and the lack of formal citations in the video limit its standalone verifiability.

The title accurately reflects the content, which is a seminar on omega-3 supplementation in preterm neonates, focusing on the DHA dilemma.

8/10

The presentation is given by a clinician-scientist with relevant expertise, based on a structured review of clinical trials and meta-analyses. The speaker discloses funding sources and presents balanced evidence, including conflicting results. However, the talk is a seminar presentation, not a peer-reviewed publication, and relies on the speaker's interpretation of the literature.

Markers derived by PSI from the transcript: the creator did not define chapters.

• 00:00Introduction and objectives of the talk.
• 02:00Definition of very preterm neonates and clinical context.
• 05:00Biological rationale for DHA supplementation.
• 10:00Historical evolution of DHA supplementation studies.
• 15:00Review of key trials: MOBYDIK and N3RO.
• 20:00Systematic review and IPDMA on BPD.
• 25:00Evidence on neurodevelopmental outcomes.
• 30:00Evidence on retinopathy of prematurity.
• 35:00Summary of findings and reasons for heterogeneity.
• 40:00Future directions and knowledge gaps.

• MOBYDIK trial — Large Canadian randomized trial on maternal DHA supplementation in preterm neonates.
• N3RO trial — Australian RCT on direct enteral DHA supplementation in preterm neonates.
• Mega DonOmega trial — RCT on combined DHA and AA supplementation in preterm neonates.
• Jensen et al. publication on BPD definition — Reference for the harmonized definition of severe BPD used in the IPDMA.

• MOBYDIK trial — The trial's findings on BPD and neurodevelopment are discussed in the presentation.
• N3RO trial — The trial's findings on BPD and neurodevelopment are discussed in the presentation.
• Mega DonOmega trial — The trial's findings on ROP are discussed in the presentation.

• Trials combining DHA and AA — These trials showed no difference in BPD, contrasting with trials using DHA alone which showed signals of increased BPD.