Malnutrition trends in preschool children from a primary healthcare center in Baghdad: A comparative two-year study (2006 and 2012)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Nutritional disorders still represent a major problem faced by developing countries. Surveying such problems is a step towards planning proper interventions, which contributes significantly to declines in under-five mortality rates. Aims: To study the state of nutritional trends in children under five years of age, attending a primary healthcare center in Al Shoula district, Iraq, in 2006 and 2012. Demographic features and feeding practices that may have had an effect on the nutritional status of children were also studied. Subjects and methods: Two cross-sectional surveys were conducted on children aged two to five years, in a primary healthcare center in Baghdad. Children attending for immunization were included (500 in 2006 and 570 in 2012), their mothers were interviewed, and the body mass index of the child was calculated. Children who were overweight and obese were identified, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention charts, as those suffering from stunting. Nutritional parameters were compared between the two study groups, using the chi-square test, as well as various epidemiological factors that may have affected the outcomes. Results: The prevalence of both types of nutritional disorders (stunting and overweight and obesity) declined remarkably according to the 2012 survey; overweight and obesity declined from 20% to 7.2%, while stunting decreased from 51.2% to 30.9%. The age group showing the highest rate of improvement were the four to five year olds, as well as children from lower-income families. A higher rate of breastfeeding was reported in 2012, and breastfed babies suffered the least from both types of nutritional disorders, in both study groups. Overall, the study findings showed a high prevalence of stunting (30.9%), together with a significant level of overweight and obesity (7.2%). Conclusion: Children in Iraq suffer from high rates of stunting. With a moderately high rate of obesity, there is an urgent need to evaluate local data available and plan for an active intervention to combat these nutritional problems.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".