Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31189698›Full record

Trial reportGlobal health, science and practice2019

Alternative Ready-To-Use Therapeutic Food Yields Less Recovery Than the Standard for Treating Acute Malnutrition in Children From Ghana.

Kristin Kohlmann, Meghan Callaghan-Gillespie, Julia M Gauglitz, Matilda Steiner-Asiedu, Kwesi Saalia, Carly Edwards, Mark J Manary

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Global health, science and practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

7 authors.

Kristin KohlmannDepartment of Pediatrics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Meghan Callaghan-GillespieDepartment of Pediatrics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Julia M GauglitzCollaborative Mass Spectrometry Innovation Center, Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Matilda Steiner-AsieduDepartment of Nutrition and Food Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana.
Kwesi SaaliaDepartment of Nutrition and Food Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana.
Carly EdwardsProject Peanut Butter, Kumasi, Ghana.
Mark J ManaryDepartment of Pediatrics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA. manarymj@wustl.edu.

Funding

Washington University Nutrition Obesity Research CenterP30DK056341 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Dominic N Reeds · 1999 to 2026
$30.2M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK056341
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOnly 20% of children with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) have access to ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF), and RUTF cost limits its accessibility.

methodsThis randomized, double-blind controlled study involved a clinical equivalence trial comparing the effectiveness of an alternative RUTF with standard RUTF in the home-based treatment of uncomplicated SAM and moderate malnutrition in Ghanaian children aged 6 to 59 months. The primary outcome was recovery, equivalence was defined as being within 5 percentage points of the control group, and an intention-to-treat analysis was used. Alternative RUTF was composed of whey protein, soybeans, peanuts, sorghum, milk, sugar, and vegetable oil. Standard RUTF included peanuts, milk, sugar, and vegetable oil. The cost of alternative RUTF ingredients was 14% less than standard RUTF. Untargeted metabolomics was used to characterize the bioactive metabolites in the RUTFs.

resultsOf the 1,270 children treated for SAM or moderate malnutrition, 554 of 628 (88%) receiving alternative RUTF recovered (95% confidence interval [CI]=85% to 90%) and 516 of 642 (80%) receiving standard RUTF recovered (95% CI=77% to 83%). The difference in recovery was 7.7% (95% CI=3.7% to 11.7%). Among the 401 children with SAM, the recovery rate was 130 of 199 (65%) with alternative RUTF and 156 of 202 (77%) with standard RUTF (

conclusionThe lower-cost alternative RUTF was less effective than standard RUTF in the treatment of severe and moderate malnutrition in Ghana.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisFast FoodsWeight GainChild Nutrition DisordersChild, PreschoolDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFood HandlingGhanaHome Care ServicesHumansInfantIntention to Treat AnalysisMaleSevere Acute MalnutritionStandard of Care

Identifiers

PMID31189698
PMCPMC6641811

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.