ArticlePloS one2024
Influence of non-directional errors in anthropometric measurements and age estimation on anthropometric prevalence indicators.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Article
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
Anthropometric prevalence indicators such as stunting, wasting, and underweight are widely-used population-level tools used to track trends in childhood nutrition. Threats to the validity of these data can lead to erroneous decision making and improper allocation of finite resources intended to support some of the world's most vulnerable populations. It has been demonstrated previously that aggregated prevalence rates for these indicators can be highly sensitive to biases in the presence of non-directional measurement errors, but the quantitative relationship between the contributing factors and the scale of this bias has not been fully described. In this work, a Monte Carlo simulation exercise was performed to generate high-statistics z-score distributions with a wide range of mean and standard deviation parameters relevant to the populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). With the important assumption that the distribution's standard deviation should be close to 1.0 in the absence of non-directional measurement errors, the shift in prevalence rate due to this common challenge is calculated and explored. Assuming access to a given z-score distribution's mean and standard deviation values, this relationship can be used to evaluate the potential scale of prevalence bias for both historical and modern anthropometric indicator results. As a demonstration of the efficacy of this exercise, the bias scale for a set of 21 child anthropometry datasets collected in LMIC contexts is presented.
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.