ArticlePloS one2026
Prevalence, diagnostic methods, and clinical outcomes of wasting/cachexia among pediatric cancer patients in Africa: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPediatric cancer is an emerging public health priority in Africa, where survival rates remain critically low compared to high-income regions. Malnutrition; specifically wasting and cachexia; is the most prevalent, yet modifiable comorbidity that compromises treatment tolerance and increases mortality. Recent primary studies from 2025 indicate a significant discrepancy between wasting diagnosed via clinical assessment versus anthropometrically defined wasting, suggesting a "hidden burden" of malnutrition in African oncology wards. However, no comprehensive synthesis of data exists regarding the prevalence of wasting across the continent using modern assessment standards, nor its specific impact on clinical outcomes in the current treatment era. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies (cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control) published from January 1, 2000, to the present. Data sources will include PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL. We will include studies involving children and adolescents (0-19 years) diagnosed with malignancies in African healthcare settings. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and assess risk of bias using Covidence systematic review software. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. The primary outcome will be the pooled prevalence of wasting/cachexia. Secondary outcomes will include diagnostic accuracy of assessment methods (such as Mid-Upper Arm Circumference [MUAC] vs. Weight-for-Height vs. clinical assessment) and associations with adverse clinical events (neutropenia, sepsis, treatment abandonment, and mortality). A random-effects meta-analysis will be performed using R software. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic and explored via subgroup analyses (region, tumor type, and assessment tool). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this study relies on secondary data. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations to inform nutritional guidelines for pediatric oncology in resource-limited settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: Registration Number: CRD420251237859.
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.