Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31490956›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Burden and determinants of malnutrition among pregnant women in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hanna Demelash Desyibelew, Abel Fekadu Dadi

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
11.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 175 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Preventing malnutrition within the first 1000 days of life in under-resourced communities: An integrative literature review.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hanna Demelash DesyibelewDepartment of Public Health Nutrition, School of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-3198-8675
Abel Fekadu DadiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Bahir Dar University · ETFlinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMalnutrition in pregnancy remains unacceptably high across all regions of Africa though promising progresses have been made globally. Primary studies might not be sufficient to portrait a comprehensive picture of malnutrition during pregnancy and its main risk factors. Therefore, we intended to review the burden of malnutrition, for this specific review implies to protein energy malnutrition, during pregnancy in Africa to present its magnitude and determinant factors.

methodsWe did a systematic review of observational studies published from January 1/2008 to January 31/2018. The CINAHL(EBSCO), MEDLINE (via Ovid), Emcare, PubMed databases and Google scholar were searched. Articles quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and studies with fair to good quality were included. We pooled malnutrition prevalence and an odds ratio estimates for risk factors after checking for heterogeneity and publication bias. This review has been registered in Prospero with a protocol number CRD42018114949.

result23 studies involving 20,672 pregnant women were included. Using a random effect model, the overall pooled prevalence of malnutrition among pregnant women in Africa was 23.5% (95%CI: 17.72-29.32; I2 = 98.5%). Based on the current review pooled odds ratio finding; rural residency (POR = 2.6%; 95%CI: 1.48-4.65; I2 = 0%), low educational status of partners (POR = 1.7%; 95%CI: 1.19-2.53; I2 = 54.8%), multiple pregnancy (POR = 2.15%; 95%CI: 1.27-3.64; I2 = 0%) and poor nutritional indicators (POR = 2.03%; 95%CI: 1.72-2.4, I2 = 0%) were positively determine maternal malnutrition. On contrary, better household economic status (POR = 0.47%; 95%CI: 0.36-0.62; I2 = 24.2%) negatively determine maternal malnutrition.

conclusionA significant number of the pregnant population in Africa are suffering of malnutrition, above 10% of the standard acceptable malnutrition rate. Thus, efforts should be renewed to ensure a proper and widespread implementation of programs that would address issues identified in the current review to reduce the burden of malnutrition.

Indexed as

AfricaDecision MakingFemaleHumansMalnutritionPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID31490956
PMCPMC6730925
OpenAlexW2971870474

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.