MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938774582 · doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqz023

Improved micronutrient status and health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries following large-scale fortification: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2938774582 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsMicronutrientFood fortificationMedicineEnvironmental healthFortificationMicronutrient deficiencyOdds ratioMalnutritionMeta-analysisAnemiaVitaminOddsPublic healthPopulationLogistic regressionFood scienceBiologyInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Micronutrient malnutrition is highly prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and disproportionately affects women and children. Although the effectiveness of large-scale food fortification (LSFF) of staple foods to prevent micronutrient deficiencies in high-income settings has been demonstrated, its effectiveness in LMICs is less well characterized. This is important as food consumption patterns, potential food vehicles, and therefore potential for impact may vary substantially in these contexts. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the real-world impact of LSFF with key micronutrients (vitamin A, iodine, iron, folic acid) on improving micronutrient status and functional health outcomes in LMICs. METHODS: All applicable published/unpublished evidence was systematically retrieved and analyzed. Studies were not restricted by age or sex. Meta-analyses were performed for quantitative outcomes and results were presented as summary RRs, ORs, or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: LSFF increased serum micronutrient concentrations in several populations and demonstrated a positive impact on functional outcomes, including a 34% reduction in anemia (RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.59, 0.74), a 74% reduction in the odds of goiter (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.43), and a 41% reduction in the odds of neural tube defects (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.49, 0.70). Additionally, we found that LSFF with vitamin A could protect nearly 3 million children per year from vitamin A deficiency. We noted an age-specific effect of fortification, with women (aged >18 y) attaining greater benefit than children, who may consume smaller quantities of fortified staple foods. Several programmatic/implementation factors were also reviewed that may facilitate or limit program potential. CONCLUSIONS: Measurable improvements in the micronutrient and health status of women and children are possible with LSFF. However, context and implementation factors are important when assessing programmatic sustainability and impact, and data on these are quite limited in LMIC studies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it