Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30246929›Full record

SynthesisMaternal & child nutrition2019

Relapse after severe acute malnutrition: A systematic literature review and secondary data analysis.

Heather C Stobaugh, Amy Mayberry, Marie McGrath, Paluku Bahwere, Noël Marie Zagre, Mark J Manary, Robert Black, Natasha Lelijveld

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Maternal & child nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

70 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Heather C StobaughFood, Nutrition, and Obesity Policy and Research Team, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0003-3827-283X
Amy MayberryNo Wasted Lives Team, Action Against Hunger, London, UK.
Marie McGrathEmergency Nutrition Network, Oxford, UK.
Paluku BahwereValid International, Oxford, UK.
Noël Marie ZagreWest and Central Africa Regional Office, UNICEF West and Central Africa Regional Office, Dakar, Senegal.
Mark J ManaryDepartment of Pediatrics, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Robert BlackInstitute for International Programs, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Natasha LelijveldNo Wasted Lives Team, Action Against Hunger, London, UK.

Funding

European Commission Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) ECHO/-WF/BUD/2017/91048
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of most treatment programs for severe acute malnutrition (SAM) in children focus on initial recovery only, leaving post-discharge outcomes, such as relapse, poorly understood and undefined. This study aimed to systematically review current literature and conduct secondary data analyses of studies that captured relapse rates, up to 18-month post-discharge, in children following recovery from SAM treatment. The literature search (including PubMed and Google Scholar) built upon two recent reviews to identify a variety of up-to-date published studies and grey literature. This search yielded 26 articles and programme reports that provided information on relapse. The proportion of children who relapsed after SAM treatment varied greatly from 0% to 37% across varying lengths of time following discharge. The lack of a standard definition of relapse limited comparability even among the few studies that have quantified post-discharge relapse. Inconsistent treatment protocols and poor adherence to protocols likely add to the wide range of relapse reported. Secondary analysis of a database from Malawi found no significant association between potential individual risk factors at admission and discharge, except being an orphan, which resulted in five times greater odds of relapse at 6 months post-discharge (95% CI [1.7, 12.4], P = 0.003). The development of a standard definition of relapse is needed for programme implementers and researchers. This will allow for assessment of programme quality regarding sustained recovery and better understanding of the contribution of relapse to local and global burden of SAM.

Indexed as

AfricaAsiaChild, PreschoolHumansInfantRecurrenceSevere Acute MalnutritionWest Indiescommunity-based management of acute malnutritionoutpatient therapeutic programmepost-discharge outcomesrelapsesevere acute malnutritionwasting

Identifiers

PMID30246929
PMCPMC6587999

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.