ReviewPublic health nutrition2021
The missing focus on women's health in the First 1,000 days approach to nutrition.
Review in Public health nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Maternal Undernutrition in Focus: Determinants among pregnant and lactating women in Kurrum District, Pakistan: A Community-based Study.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Engaging stakeholders in the north-west first 1000 days project: building a strong community support ecosystem.BMC public health · 2025Article
- An evidence review and nutritional conceptual framework for pre-eclampsia prevention.The British journal of nutrition · 2023Review
- Towards a mother-centred maternal health promotion.Health promotion international · 2023Article
- Time to recovery and its predictors among children 6-59 months with acute malnutrition admitted to community inpatient therapeutic feeding centers in Katsina State, Northwest Nigeria: a retrospective review of health records (2010-2016).Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2023Article
- Breastfeeding and infant care as 'sexed' care work: reconsideration of the three Rs to enable women's rights, economic empowerment, nutrition and health.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- Fetal programming of obesity and type 2 diabetes.World journal of diabetes · 2022Review
- Gut microbiome development and childhood undernutrition.Cell host & microbe · 2022Review
- Vertical Transfer of Metabolites Detectable from Newborn's Dried Blood Spot Samples Using UPLC-MS: A Chemometric Study.Metabolites · 2022Article
- Beyond Reproduction: The "First 1,000 Days" Approach to Nutrition through a Gendered Rights-Based Lens.Health and human rights · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The First 1,000 Days approach highlights the time between conception and a child's second birthday as a critical period where adequate nutrition is essential for adequate development and growth throughout the child's life and potentially onto their own offspring. Based on a review of relevant literature, this commentary explores the First 1,000 Days approach with a maternal lens. While the primary objective of the First 1,000 Days approach to nutrition is to reduce child malnutrition rates, particularly chronic undernutrition in the form of stunting, interventions are facilitated through mothers in terms of promoting healthy behaviours such as exclusive breast-feeding and attention to her nutritional status during pregnancy and lactation. Though these interventions were facilitated through women, women's health indicators are rarely tracked and measured, which we argue represents a missed opportunity to strengthen the evidence base for associations between maternal nutrition and women's health outcomes. Limited evidence on the effects of dietary interventions with pregnant and lactating mothers on women's health outcomes hinders advocacy efforts, which then contributes to lower prioritisation and less research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.