ArticleEpidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil2024
Complementary feeding indicators from the World Health Organization and the Ministry of Health: agreement analysis and comparison of estimated prevalence in a cohort of children in southwestern Bahia, Brazil, 2018.
Article in Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil, 2024. 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.
- Study on Gender-specific Population at Risk of Developing Dementia, Anxiety and Depression Following Exposure to COVID-19.Annals of neurosciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the agreement between complementary feeding indicators established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Ministry of Health (MOH) and to compare the prevalence of these indicators in the first year of a child's life.
methods: This was a cross-sectional study in a cohort of 286 children from Vitória da Conquista, state of Bahia, Brazil; agreement between indicators and comparison between prevalences were analyzed using the Kappa coefficient and McNemar's test; the prevalence of the indicators "introduction of complementary feeding" (ICF), "minimum dietary diversity" (MDD), "minimum meal frequency" (MMF) and "minimum acceptable diet" (MAD) were calculated.
results: Three indicators showed poor agreement, with only one demonstrating moderate agreement; prevalence of WHO indicators was higher than that of the MOH (ICF, 94.3% vs. 20.7%; MDD, 75.2% vs. 50.7%; MMF, 97.2% vs. 44.8%; MAD, 96.8% vs. 26.9%).
conclusionThe majority of indicators showed poor agreement and the prevalence of WHO indicators exceeded that of the Ministry of Health.
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.