Systematic review on evidence‐based adolescent nutrition interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is a critical stage in the life cycle, and adequate nutrition is necessary for the proper growth and development of individuals and their offspring. Here, we comprehensively review all published systematic reviews (through October 2016) on adolescents (10-19 years) and women of reproductive age, including pregnant women, which targeted interventions related to nutrition. For interventions where there was no existing systematic review on adolescents, we reviewed primary studies/trials. We included interventions on micronutrient supplementation (iron, folic acid, iron-folic acid (IFA), calcium, vitamin D, vitamin A, zinc, iodine, and multiple micronutrients), food/protein energy supplementation, nutrition education for pregnant adolescents, obesity prevention and management, and management of gestational diabetes. We identified a total of 35 systematic reviews, of which only five were conducted on adolescents, and 107 primary studies on adolescents. Our review suggests that iron alone, IFA, zinc, and multiple micronutrient supplementation in adolescents can significantly improve serum hemoglobin concentration. While zinc supplementation in pregnant adolescents showed improvements in preterm birth and low birth weight, we found a paucity of trials on calcium, vitamin D, vitamin A, and iodine supplementation. We found limited evidence on food/protein energy supplementation in adolescents. Interventions to prevent and manage obesity showed a nonsignificant impact on reducing body mass index. This review underscores the importance of adolescent nutrition interventions. It is imperative that countries design nutritional interventions, particularly for adolescents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".