Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34887302›Full record

SynthesisBMJ global health2021

Economic inequality in malnutrition: a global systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rotimi Alao, Hayaan Nur, Emily Fivian, Bhavani Shankar, Suneetha Kadiyala, Helen Harris-Fry

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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 1 country.

Rotimi AlaoDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Hayaan NurDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Emily FivianDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Bhavani ShankarDepartment of Geography, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Suneetha KadiyalaDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Helen Harris-FryDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK helen.harris-fry@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-2367-908X
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 210894/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the evidence on global and regional economic inequality in malnutrition, and the associations between economic inequality and malnutrition.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Between 1 November 2020 and 22 January 2021, we searched Medline, Embase, Global Health, Eldis, Web of Science and EBSCO Discovery Service. We contacted 39 experts and tracked citations. We included any study reporting a concentration index (CIX) relating economic status and nutritional status and any multilevel study reporting an association between economic inequality and nutritional status. Nutritional status was measured as stunting, wasting, anaemia, or overweight in children (<5 years), or underweight, overweight or obesity, or anaemia in adults (15-49 years). We had no study date or language restriction. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS tool). We mapped estimates and pooled them using multilevel random-effects meta-analyses.

resultsFrom 6185 results, 91 studies provided 426 CIX (>2.9 million people) and 47 associations (~3.9 million people). Stunting (CIX -0.15 (95% CI -0.19 to -0.11)) and wasting (-0.03 (95% CI -0.05 to -0.02)) are concentrated among poor households. Adult overweight and obesity is concentrated in wealthier households (0.08 (95% CI -0.00 to 0.17)), particularly in South Asia (0.26 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.34)), but not in Europe and Central Asia (-0.02 (95% CI -0.08 to 0.05)) or North America (-0.04 (95% CI -0.10 to 0.03)). We found no association between 0.1 increase in Gini coefficient and adult underweight (OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.12)) or overweight and obesity (0.92 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.05)).

conclusionsThere is good evidence that the prevalence of malnutrition varies by levels of absolute economic status. Undernutrition is concentrated in poor households, whereas concentration of overweight and obesity by economic status depends on region, and we lack information on economic inequalities in anaemia and child overweight. In contrast, links between malnutrition and relative economic status are less clear and should not be assumed; robust evidence on causal pathways is needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020201572.

Indexed as

MalnutritionAdultChildCross-Sectional StudiesGrowth DisordersHumansSocioeconomic FactorsThinnessnutritionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34887302
PMCPMC8663078
OpenAlexW3216678129

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.