ArticleBMJ nutrition, prevention & health2021
Assessment, outcomes and implications of multiple anthropometric deficits in children.
Article in BMJ nutrition, prevention & health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Child stunting starts in utero: Growth trajectories and determinants in Ugandan infants.Maternal & child nutrition · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalnutrition in children is widely prevalent around the world. It has been observed that malnourished children with multiple anthropometric deficits have higher mortality. However, adequate studies are not available on the outcome and recovery of these children.Nandurbar, a tribal district from Maharashtra, India, shows high prevalence of all three forms of malnutrition, often occurring simultaneously. A project previously undertaken in Nandurbar from July 2014 to June 2016 studied the effect of various therapeutic feeds in treatment of children with uncomplicated severe acute malnutrition (SAM). In this study, we analyse secondary data from it to correlate effects of stunting, wasting and underweight on treatment recovery.
methodsAnalysis was done on 5979 children with SAM using linear and logistic regression on R software for recovery rates and weight gain in children with SAM with single versus multiple anthropometric deficits, their relation to age, sex, and recovery from severe stunting by gain in height.
resultsThe mean age of children was 35 months and 53.1% of the children were males. 2346 (39.2%) children recovered at the end of the 8-week treatment. 454 (7.6%) had single anthropometric deficit (SAM only), 3164 (52.9%) had two anthropometric deficits (SAM and severe underweight (SUW)) and 2355 (39.4%) children had three anthropometric deficits (SAM, SUW and severe stunting). Out of the 5979 children with SAM, only 52 (0.9%) of children were not underweight (severe or moderate).44.94% of children with SAM who were severely stunted recovered, compared with 35.52% of children who were not (p<0.001). After controlling for confounders, severe stunting was found to increase the odds of recovery by 1.49. Severely stunted children with SAM also showed faster recovery and weight gain by 1.93 days (p<0.012) and 0.29 g/kg/day (p<0.001), respectively. Recovery was higher in females and younger age group. Recovery was also found to depend on the therapeutic feed, with children receiving medical nutrition therapy showing better recovery for severely stunted children.
conclusionOur findings corroborate previous literature that stunting is a way for the body to deal with chronic stress of nutritional deprivation and provides a survival advantage to a child.
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.