Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34707425›Full record

ArticleClinical medicine insights. Pediatrics2021

Anthropometric Criteria for Identifying Infants Under 6 Months of Age at Risk of Morbidity and Mortality: A Systematic Review.

Christoph Hoehn, Natasha Lelijveld, Martha Mwangome, James A Berkley, Marie McGrath, Marko Kerac

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical medicine insights. Pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A Dedicated Multidisciplinary Growth and Feeding Clinic for Infants with Cleft Lip and/or Palate Demonstrates Need for Intervention.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Christoph HoehnLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Natasha LelijveldEmergency Nutrition Network, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8452-0198
Martha MwangomeKenya Medical Research Institute/Wellcome Trust Research Program, Kilifi, Kenya.
James A BerkleyKenya Medical Research Institute/Wellcome Trust Research Program, Kilifi, Kenya.
Marie McGrathEmergency Nutrition Network, Oxford, UK.
Marko KeracLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Kenya Medical Research Institute · KELondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/M007367/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing global focus on small and nutritionally at-risk infants aged <6 months (<6 m). Current WHO guidelines recommend weight-for-length

methodsWe searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library and POPLINE for studies conducted in low- and middle-income countries and published between 1990 and October 2020. We included studies reporting anthropometric assessment of nutritional status in infants <6 m and assessed the association with subsequent morbidity or mortality.

resultsA total of 19 studies were included in the final review, covering 20 countries, predominantly in sub-Saharan Africa. WLZ had poor reliability and poor prognostic ability to identify infants at risk of death. Mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) and weight-for-age

conclusionEvidence from our review suggests that a change in current practice is necessary. To better identify small and nutritionally at-risk infants <6 m WAZ and/or MUAC rather than WLZ should be used. Future research should explore possible benefits for programme coverage, impact and cost-effectiveness. Research should also examine if context-specific MUAC thresholds are needed.

Indexed as

anthropometrydiagnosisinfantsmalnutritionmanagement of at-risk mothers and infants (MAMI)Wasting

Identifiers

PMID34707425
PMCPMC8543668
OpenAlexW3210055772

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.