ArticleThe British journal of nutrition2025
Illustration of a process for the calculation and validation of minimum dietary diversity indicators using an existing dataset of 2 to younger than 10-year-old children.
Article in The British journal of nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
This study aims to illustrate a process approach for the calculation of minimum dietary diversity (MDD) indicators for interpretation of dietary diversity (DD) scores and to validate the MDD indicator as a proxy for adequate micronutrient intake using an existing dataset for 2 to younger than 10-year-old South African children. The DD scores were derived from nine food groups, adjusted from the ten food groups for women of reproductive age by combining pulses, nuts and seeds. Three reference methods were used to inspect micronutrient adequacy, namely the mean adequacy ratio and the mean probability of adequacy (MPA) using a single 24-h recall, and the MPA derived from usual intake using more than one 24-hour recall in a sub-sample. Adequacy threshold levels and candidate MDD indicators were inspected and validated using several performance criteria. Results show that the mean and median DD scores were 3·6 and 3·1, respectively. The resulting MDD indicators varied between 3 and 4 out of nine food groups favouring the identification of children with adequate and inadequate intake, respectively, depending on the method used and the age group. Our results and those from others furthermore support a simplified method or 'rule of thumb' for the determination of an MDD indicator to establish the integer values below and above the median of the DD scores. We conclude that finding a valid MDD indicator can be done using different methodologies and that results underscore the potential of a simplified method for determining an MDD indicator.
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.