ArticleThe Journal of nutrition2021
Relation between Timing of High-Dose Vitamin A Supplementation and Modified-Relative-Dose-Response Values in Children 12-23 Months in Uganda.
Article in The Journal of nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigh-dose vitamin A (VA) supplements (VAS) can temporarily affect VA status. Hence, micronutrient surveys might need to be timed around VAS campaigns to accurately estimate VA deficiency (VAD) prevalence. Little is known about optimal timing of micronutrient surveys when the modified-relative-dose-response (MRDR) is used as a VA indicator.
objectivesWe evaluated the association between days since the end of a VAS campaign and MRDR values in children aged 12-23 mo in Uganda.
methodsWe pooled data from 2 cross-sectional, population-based surveys in eastern Uganda conducted in 2015-2016 (n = 118 children). We estimated the prevalence of VAD (MRDR ≥0.060). Days since the end of a VAS campaign ("days since VAS") was calculated as the interview date minus the end date of the VAS campaign. The MRDR value was assessed using HPLC. We excluded children whose MRDR values were below the limit of detection (<0.007). We used linear regression to evaluate the association between days since VAS and log-transformed MRDR. In adjusted analyses, we controlled for potential confounders. Statistical analyses accounted for the surveys' complex design.
resultsThe prevalence of VAD was 5.2% (95% CI: 1.1%, 9.3%). Mean days since VAS was 54.1 d (range 39-68 d). Days since VAS was not associated with log-transformed MRDR in unadjusted analyses ($\hat{\beta } = \ $0.0055; 95% CI: -0.009, 0.020; P = 0.45) or adjusted analyses ($\hat{\beta } = $ -0.0073; 95% CI: -0.024, 0.010; P = 0.39).
conclusionsMRDR measurement through a nutrition survey began as early as 1.3 mo after the end of a VAS campaign in eastern Uganda. Days since the end of a VAS campaign was not associated with MRDR in Ugandan children aged 12-23 mo. Future studies should consider longitudinal designs and evaluate time since VAS and MRDR in children of different ages and in regions with higher VAD prevalence.
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.