ArticleBMJ open2021
Examining the double burden of malnutrition for preschool children and women of reproductive age in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe majority of the populations in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) are encountering the double burden of malnutrition (DBM): the coexistence of both undernutrition and overnutrition sequalae. With DBM being a new phenomenon in research, little is known about its aetiology, operational definitions and risk factors influencing its manifestation. The proposed scoping review is aimed at mapping literature with regard to the DBM phenomenon among preschool children and women of reproductive age in LMICs who are among the most high-risk groups to encounter DBM.
methodsA comprehensive literature search will be conducted in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, LILACS and ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis Global. Additionally, searches in other government and institutional sources (WHO website and university repositories) and forward and backward citation tracking of seminal articles will also be done. Two reviewers will independently conduct title and abstract screening and full-text screening. Similarly, data extraction and coding will independently be done by two reviewers. Information extracted from included literature will be analysed qualitatively using thematic analysis approach and reported as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study because the review is based on literature from publicly available sources. The dissemination of our findings will be done through presentations in relevant conferences and publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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.