Geostatistical modelling of the association between malaria and child growth in Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Undernutrition among children under 5 years of age continues to be a public health challenge in many low- and middle-income countries and can lead to growth stunting. Infectious diseases may also affect child growth, however their actual impact on the latter can be difficult to quantify. In this paper, we analyse data from 20 Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) conducted in 13 African countries to investigate the relationship between malaria and stunting. Our objective is to make inference on the association between malaria incidence during the first year of life and height-for-age Z-scores (HAZs). METHODS: We develop a geostatistical model for HAZs as a function of both measured and unmeasured child-specific and spatial risk factors. We visualize stunting risk in each of the 20 analysed surveys by mapping the predictive probability that HAZ is below - 2. Finally, we carry out a meta-analysis by modelling the estimated effects of malaria incidence on HAZ from each DHS as a linear regression on national development indicators from the World Bank. RESULTS: A non-spatial univariate linear regression of HAZ on malaria incidence showed a negative association in 18 out of 20 surveys. However, after adjusting for spatial risk factors and controlling for confounding effects, we found a weaker association between HAZ and malaria, with a mix of positive and negative estimates, of which 3 out of 20 are significantly different from zero at the conventional 5% level. The meta-analysis showed that this variation in the estimated effect of malaria incidence on HAZ is significantly associated with the amount of arable land. CONCLUSION: Confounding effects on the association between malaria and stunting vary both by country and over time. Geostatistical analysis provides a useful framework that allows to account for unmeasured spatial confounders. Establishing whether the association between malaria and stunting is causal would require longitudinal follow-up data on individual children.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".