ArticleBMC public health2026
Household soybean processing, protein content, and caregiver acceptability of complementary porridges in rural Malawi.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChild undernutrition remains a major public health challenge in Malawi, where inadequate dietary protein contributes to persistent stunting and poor child health outcomes. Soybean (Glycine max) is a locally cultivable and protein-rich crop with potential to strengthen complementary feeding in resource-constrained rural settings. However, the nutritional and practical effectiveness of soybean-based complementary foods depends on household-level processing methods and caregiver acceptability.
methodsA community-based experimental study was conducted in Dowa District, Central Malawi, in July 2025. Four locally cultivated soybean varieties were subjected to five household-level processing methods: untreated (control), soaked, roasted, dehulled, and dehulled-and-roasted. Protein content was determined using the Kjeldahl method with triplicate laboratory analyses. Caregiver sensory evaluation was conducted among 60 caregivers attending under-five clinics using structured tasting sessions assessing aroma, flavour, texture, and overall acceptability on a 10-point Likert scale. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis H tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, repeated-measures ANOVA, and bootstrap resampling to estimate 95% confidence intervals.
resultsMeasured protein content differed significantly across soybean processing methods (H = 12.68, df = 4, p = 0.013). Dehulled soybean flour demonstrated the highest measured protein content (21.26% ± 0.12; 95% CI: 21.12-21.40), while soaked soybean flour demonstrated the lowest (11.85% ± 0.11; 95% CI: 11.73-11.97). Caregiver sensory evaluation additionally differed significantly across processing methods (p < 0.05). Dehulled-and-roasted soybean porridge achieved the highest overall acceptability score (8.2 ± 0.2), followed by dehulled soybean porridge (7.8 ± 0.4). Integrated assessment demonstrated that dehulled and dehulled-and-roasted soybean processing methods produced the most favorable combined nutritional and caregiver acceptability outcomes.
conclusionHousehold soybean processing methods substantially influence both measured protein content and caregiver sensory acceptability of soybean porridge in rural complementary feeding contexts. Dehulling, with or without roasting, represents a locally feasible household processing strategy with potential to strengthen soybean-based complementary feeding using existing agricultural resources. The findings highlight the importance of integrating nutritional quality with caregiver acceptability in the development of sustainable community-based child nutrition interventions in low-resource settings.
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.