ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2020
Divergence and agreement on nutrient intake between the two food composition tables of Bangladesh.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the food composition tables: Beyond the divergence of intakes.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Article
- Response to evaluation of the food composition tables: Beyond the divergence and agreement of intakes.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Article
- Divergence and agreement on nutrient intake between the two food composition tables of Bangladesh.Maternal & child nutrition · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Bangladesh, two food composition tables (FCTs) were published over two consecutive years, in 2012 and in 2013. When different databases are used to calculate nutrient intakes, assessment of divergence and agreements is required. This study aimed to compare the differences in nutrient intakes, to assess the similarities in nutrient intakes between the two FCTs, and to explore the factors that cause the difference in nutrient intakes, if any. A total sample of 40 households was taken from the Household Income Expenditure Survey of 2010. Adult male equivalent (AME) units were used to estimate weighted average intake. Weighted k statistics were used to assess agreements between the two FCTs. Although median intake of energy and energy-yielding nutrients (protein, fats, and carbohydrates) were found statistically significant between the two databases, the differences were not large enough to have practical significance. Excellent agreements were found in energy and carbohydrates with good for fats and fair for protein. However, statistically significant median percent differences were seen in beta carotene (441%), vitamin B6 (153%), and folate (129%), vitamin C (106%), zinc (101%), and iron (41%) intakes. For thiamin, iron, calcium, and phosphorous, more than 50% of the subjects were found in the same quintile, whereas nine out of 15 vitamins and minerals were misclassified into the opposite quintiles (≥10%). Fair agreements were found for most of the micronutrients. Variations in analytical methods and sources of nutrient information were the main contributing factors for actual differences. FCT data should be interpreted with caution, especially for micronutrients.
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.