ArticlePublic health nutrition2021
Use of mid-upper arm circumference to screen for thinness among sub-Saharan African male detainees.
Article 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 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mid-upper arm circumference cut-offs identifying malnourishment and risk of mortality among patients with tuberculosis.BMC public health · 2025Observational
- Mid-upper arm circumference as a substitute for body mass index in the assessment of nutritional status among adults in eastern Sudan.BMC public health · 2022Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBMI is a time-intensive measurement to assess nutritional status. Mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) has been studied as a proxy for BMI in adults, but there is no consensus on its optimal use.
designWe calculated sensitivity, specificity and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC) of MUAC for BMI < 18·5, <17 and <16 kg/m2. We designed a system using two MUAC cut-offs, with a healthy (non-thin) 'green' group, a 'yellow' group requiring BMI measurement and a 'red' group who could proceed directly to treatment for thinness.
settingWe retrospectively analysed monitoring data collected by the International Committee of the Red Cross in places of detention.
participants11 917 male detainees in eight African countries.
resultsMUAC had excellent discriminatory ability with AUROCC: 0·87, 0·90 and 0·92 for BMI < 18·5, BMI < 17 and BMI < 16 kg/m2, respectively. An upper cut-off of MUAC 25·5 cm to exclude healthy detainees would result in 64 % fewer detainees requiring BMI screening and had sensitivity 77 % (95 % CI 69·4, 84·7) and specificity 79·6 % (95 % CI 72·6, 86·5) for BMI < 18·5 kg/m2. A lower cut-off of MUAC < 21·0 cm had sensitivity 25·4 % (95 % CI 11·7, 39·1) and specificity 99·0 % (95 % CI 97·9, 100·0) for BMI < 16 kg/m2. An additional 50 kg weight requirement improved specificity to 99·6 % (95 % CI 99·0, 100·0) with similar sensitivity.
conclusionsA MUAC cut-off of 25·5 cm, above which detainees are classified as healthy and below receive further screening, would result in significant time savings. A cut-off of <21·0 cm and weight <50 kg can identify some detainees with BMI < 16 kg/m2 who require immediate treatment.
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.