Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40378371›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2025

Effectiveness of a reduced dose of ready-to-use therapeutic food in community-based management of severe acute malnutrition: A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Julien Ntaongo Alendi, Cécile Salpeteur, Steve Botomba, Alemayehu Argaw, Victor Nikièma, Jean-Baptiste Mayavanga, Benjamin Guesdon, Marie Petry, Uwimana Sebinwa, Sophie Bruneau and 4 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Julien Ntaongo AlendiUniversity of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0624-7189
Cécile SalpeteurResearch, Analyses & Learning Service, Expertise & Advocacy Dept, Action Against Hunger, Montreuil, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8135-6169
Steve BotombaDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3355-7449
Alemayehu ArgawDepartment of Food technology, Safety, and Health, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3982-5408
Victor NikièmaResearch, Analyses & Learning Service, Expertise & Advocacy Dept, Action Against Hunger, Montreuil, France.
Jean-Baptiste MayavangaNational Nutrition Program, Ministry of Public Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Benjamin GuesdonResearch, Analyses & Learning Service, Expertise & Advocacy Dept, Action Against Hunger, Montreuil, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2876-0533
Marie PetryNutrition & Health Service, Operations Department, Action Against Hunger, Montreuil, France.
Uwimana SebinwaNutrition & Health Service, Operations Department, Action Against Hunger, Montreuil, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0149-1494
Sophie BruneauNutrition & Health Service, Operations Department, Action Against Hunger, Montreuil, France.
Aimée Mupuala MasayaDepartment of Pediatrics, University Clinics, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Florence Mbiya MuadiNeuro-psycho-pathological Center, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Samuel Mampunza Ma MieziNeuro-psycho-pathological Center, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Marie-Claire MuyerDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe reduced Ready-to-use Therapeutic Food (RUTF) dose strategy was demonstrated effective in recovering children with Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) in ideal conditions and in a context of food security. The present study was conducted to provide further evidence on the effectiveness of reduced RUTF dose in a context of high food insecurity and post conflict humanitarian crisis, and with routine health staff. METHODS AND

findingsAn individually randomized non-inferiority trial was conducted in 968 children aged 6-59 months suffering from SAM without medical complications in 14 health centers in the Bonzola and Nzaba health zones of Kasaï Oriental, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Children were randomly assigned to either a control group receiving the standard WHO (World Health Organization) RUTF dose at the time or an intervention group receiving a reduced RUTF dose starting from the third week of treatment. The primary outcome was weight gain velocity from admission to discharge from treatment, while secondary outcomes included anthropometry measurements, programmatic outcomes and relapse. Mixed effects linear and logistic regression models with the health center as random intercept were used to compare differences between the two study groups. Close to 94% of the children were from severely food insecure households. There was no difference in weight gain velocity between the two groups (4.88 ± 2.36 g/kg/d reduced dose group versus 5.09 ± 2.28 g/kg/d standard dose group; difference -0.09 g/kg/d (95% CI [-0.33, 0.15]; p = 0.46). Programmatic outcomes were also similar between the two groups: recovery rate (64.3% versus 67.0%), loss to follow-up (4.69% versus 5.23%), defaulter rate (2.65% and 1.88%), relapse rate over 3 months (2.86% versus 2.40%) and mean length of stay (42 versus 43 days). Nevertheless, the rate of mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) gain from the third week onwards was lower in the reduced-dose group than in the standard-dose group, with a mean difference of -0.13 mm/week (95% CI [-0.25, -0.01]; p = 0.04). There was no difference in terms of serious adverse events, in the reduced versus standard dose: weight loss (2.24% versus 1.26%), weight stagnation (14.9% versus 17.0%), and medical complications (4.08% versus 3.77%). Important effect modifiers identified were: child sex, child age, season of admission and missed treatment visits.

conclusionsThe strategy of a reduced RUTF dose starting from the third week of treatment is as effective as the standard dose strategy on weight gain velocity and programmatic outcomes in a context of severe food insecurity. However, MUAC gain velocity was lower in the reduced dose group. Future studies should investigate the effectiveness of a reduced dose strategy among sub group of children with high risk factors. Trial registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Network (ISRCTN15258669).

Indexed as

Fast FoodsSevere Acute MalnutritionChild, PreschoolDemocratic Republic of the CongoFemaleHumansInfantMaleTreatment OutcomeWeight Gain

Identifiers

PMID40378371
PMCPMC12084047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.