ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Complementary and alternative metrics for tracking population-level trends in child linear growth.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quantifying child growth effects using height-age instead of height-for-age z-scores in a meta-analysis of small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplement trials.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Stunting Reversal versus Regression to the Mean in Epidemiological Studies of Child Linear Growth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- Article
- Spatial difference analysis and dynamic evolution prediction of urban industrial integrated water use efficiency in China.Heliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stunting prevalence is commonly used to track population-level child nutritional status. However, other metrics derived from anthropometric datasets may be used as alternatives to stunting or provide complementary perspectives on the status of linear growth faltering in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Data from 156 Demographic and Health Surveys in 63 LMICs (years 2000 to 2020) were used to generate 2 types of linear growth metrics: (i) measures of location of height distributions (including stunting) for under-5 years (<5y) and 2 to 5 years (2-5y); (ii) model-derived metrics including predicted mean height-for-age z-score (HAZ) at 0, 2, and 5 years; interval slopes of HAZ, height-for-age difference (HAD), and growth delay (GD) from 1 month to 2 years (1mo-2y) and 2-5y; and the SITAR intensity parameter (SITAR-IP) for <5y. Using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r), metrics were considered alternatives to stunting if very strongly correlated with stunting (|r|≥0.95) and at least as strongly correlated as stunting with selected population indicators (under 5y mortality, gross domestic product, maternal education). Metrics were considered complementary if less strongly correlated with stunting (|r|<0.95) yet correlated with population indicators. We identified 6 of 15 candidate metrics (stunting 2-5y, mean HAZ <5y and 2-5y, p25 HAZ <5y and 2-5y, predicted HAZ at 2y) as potential alternatives to stunting and 6 as complementary metrics (SITAR-IP, predicted HAZ at 5y, HAZ slope 1m-2y, HAD slope 1m-2y, GD slopes 1m-2y and 2-5y). Three metrics (HAZ slope 2-5y, HAD slope 2-5y years and predicted HAZ at birth) had weak correlations with population indicators (|r| ≤ 0.43). In conclusion, several linear growth metrics could serve as alternatives to stunting prevalence and others may be complementary to stunting in tracking global progress in child health and nutrition. Further research is needed to explore the real-world utility of these alternative and complementary metrics.
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.