Trial reportMaternal & child nutrition2024
Three-arm clinical trial of improved flour targeting intestinal microbiota (MALINEA).
Trial report in Maternal & child nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Community-Based Interventions for Childhood Undernutrition in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Maternal & child nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Three-arm clinical trial of improved flour targeting intestinal microbiota (MALINEA).Maternal & child nutrition · 2024Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main objective of this project was to compare in the field conditions two strategies of re-nutrition of children with moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) aged from 6 to 24 months, targeting the microbiota in comparison with a standard regimen. A three-arm, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial was conducted in four countries (Niger, CAR, Senegal and Madagascar). Children received for 12 weeks either fortified blended flour (FBF control) = arm 1, or FBF + azithromycin (oral suspension of 20 mg/kg/day daily given with a syringe) for the first 3 days at inclusion = arm 2 or mix FBF with inulin/fructo-oligosaccharides (6 g/day if age ≥12 months and 4 g if age <12 months) = arm 3. For each arm, children aged from 6 to 11 months received 100 g x 2 per day of flours and those aged from 12 to 24 months received 100 g × 3 per day of FBF. The primary endpoint was nutritional recovery, defined by reaching a weight-for-height z-score (WHZ) ≥ -1.5 within 12 weeks. Overall, 881 children were randomised (297, 290 and 294 in arm 1, arm 2 and arm 3, respectively). Three hundred and forty-four children were males (39%) and median/mean age were 14.6/14.4 months (SD = 4.9, IQR = 10.5-18.4). At inclusion, the three arms were comparable for all criteria, but differences were observed between countries. Overall, 44% (390/881) of the children recovered at week 12 from MAM, with no significant difference between the three arms (41.4%, 45.5% and 45.9%, in arm 1, arm 2 and arm 3, respectively, p = 0.47). This study did not support the true advantages of adding a prebiotic or antibiotic to flour. When using a threshold of WHZ ≥ -2 as an exploratory endpoint, significant differences were observed between the three arms, with higher success rates in arms with antibiotics or prebiotics compared to the control arm (66.9%, 66.0% and 55.2%, respectively, p = 0.005).
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.