Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33292633›Full record

ArticleBMC nutrition2020

Comparison of anthropometric data quality in children aged 6-23 and 24-59 months: lessons from population-representative surveys from humanitarian settings.

Oleg Bilukha, Alexia Couture, Kelly McCain, Eva Leidman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Oleg BilukhaEmergency Response and Recovery Branch, Division of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control, 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA, 30329, USA.
Alexia CoutureEmergency Response and Recovery Branch, Division of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control, 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA, 30329, USA.
Kelly McCainRollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, USA.
Eva LeidmanEmergency Response and Recovery Branch, Division of Global Health Protection, Center for Global Health, Centers for Disease Control, 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA, 30329, USA. eleidman@cdc.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4191-5931
Center for Global Health · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · UGEmory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnsuring the quality of anthropometry data is paramount for getting accurate estimates of malnutrition prevalence among children aged 6-59 months in humanitarian and refugee settings. Previous reports based on data from Demographic and Health Surveys suggested systematic differences in anthropometric data quality between the younger and older groups of preschool children.

methodsWe analyzed 712 anthropometric population-representative field surveys from humanitarian and refugee settings conducted during 2011-2018. We examined and compared the quality of five anthropometric indicators in children aged 6-23 months and children aged 24-59 months: weight for height, weight for age, height for age, body mass index for age and mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) for age. Using the z-score distribution of each indicator, we calculated the following parameters: standard deviation (SD), percentage of outliers, and measures of distribution normality. We also examined and compared the quality of height, weight, MUAC and age measurements using missing data and rounding criteria.

resultsBoth SD and percentage of flags were significantly smaller on average in older than in younger age group for all five anthropometric indicators. Differences in SD between age groups did not change meaningfully depending on overall survey quality or on the quality of age ascertainment. Over 50% of surveys overall did not deviate significantly from normality. The percentage of non-normal surveys was higher in older than in the younger age groups. Digit preference score for weight, height and MUAC was slightly higher in younger age group, and for age slightly higher in the older age group. Children with reported exact date of birth (DOB) had much lower digit preference for age than those without exact DOB. SD, percentage flags and digit preference scores were positively correlated between the two age groups at the survey level, such as those surveys showing higher anthropometry data quality in younger age group also tended to show higher quality in older age group.

conclusionsThere should be an emphasis on increased rigor of training survey measurers in taking anthropometric measurements in the youngest children. Standardization test, a mandatory component of the pre-survey measurer training and evaluation, of 10 children should include at least 4-5 children below 2 years of age.

Indexed as

Age groupAnthropometryData qualityHumanitarianSurvey

Identifiers

PMID33292633
PMCPMC7664017
OpenAlexW3100445650

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.