Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25423084›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Prevalence and risk factors of anaemia among children aged between 6 months and 14 years in Kenya.

Oscar Ngesa, Henry Mwambi

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Oscar NgesaSchool of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
Henry MwambiSchool of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnaemia is one of the significant public health problems among children in the world. Understanding risk factors of anaemia provides more insight to the nature and types of policies that can be put up to fight anaemia. We estimated the prevalence and risk factors of anaemia in a population-based, cross-sectional survey. METHODOLOGY: Blood samples from 11,711 children aged between 6 months and 14 years were collected using a single-use, spring-loaded, sterile lancet to make a finger prick. Anaemia was measured based on haemoglobin concentration level. The generalized linear model framework was used to analyse the data, in which the response variable was either a child was anemic or not anemic.

resultsThe overall prevalence of anaemia among the children in Kenya was estimated to be 28.8%. Across each band of age within which the definition of anaemia remained constant (0–4, 5–11, and 12–14 years old), the prevalence of anaemia declined with each year of age. [corrected]. The risk of anaemia was significantly higher in male than female children. Mothers with secondary and above education had a protective effect on the risk of anaemia on their children. Malaria diagnosis status of a child was positively associated with risk anaemia.

conclusionControlling co-morbidity of malaria and improving maternal knowledge are potential options for reducing the burden of anaemia.

Indexed as

AdolescentAnemiaChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantKenyaMalePrevalenceRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID25423084
PMCPMC4244137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.