Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37049590›Full record

SynthesisNutrients2023

A Systematic Review on the Optimal Dose and Duration of Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food (RUTF) for 6-59-Month-Old Children with Severe Wasting or Oedema.

Blessings H Likoswe, Bernadette Chimera-Khombe, Noel Patson, Apatsa Selemani, Isabel Potani, John Phuka, Kenneth Maleta

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Blessings H LikosweDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.ORCID 0000-0003-4583-7683
Bernadette Chimera-KhombeDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.ORCID 0000-0002-7238-1469
Noel PatsonDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.
Apatsa SelemaniDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.
Isabel PotaniDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.ORCID 0000-0002-3494-534X
John PhukaDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.
Kenneth MaletaDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Global and Public Health, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Private Bag 360, Chichiri, Blantyre 312225, Malawi.
Kamuzu Central Hospital · MWUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

World Health Organisation none
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends that severe wasting and/or oedema should be treated with ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF) at a dose of 150-220 kcal/kg/day for 6-8 weeks. Emerging evidence suggests that variations of RUTF dosing regimens from the WHO recommendation are not inferior. We aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and effectiveness of different RUTF doses and durations in comparison with the current WHO RUTF dose recommendation for treating severe wasting and/or oedema among 6-59-month-old children. A systematic literature search identified three studies for inclusion, and the outcomes of interest included anthropometric recovery, anthropometric measures and indices, non-response, time to recovery, readmission, sustained recovery, and mortality. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD 42021276757. Only three studies were eligible for analysis. There was an overall high risk of bias for two of the studies and some concerns for the third study. Overall, there were no differences between the reduced and standard RUTF dose groups in all outcomes of interest. Despite the finding of no differences between reduced and standard-dose RUTF, the studies are too few to conclusively declare that reduced RUTF dose was more efficacious than standard RUTF.

Indexed as

MalnutritionSevere Acute MalnutritionCachexiaChildChild, PreschoolEdemaFast FoodsHumansInfantTreatment Outcomeready-to-use therapeutic foodsevere acute malnutritionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37049590
PMCPMC10096907
OpenAlexW4362560463

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.