MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012506632 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0229698

The recovery rate from severe acute malnutrition among under-five years of children remains low in sub-Saharan Africa. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

2020· review· en· W3012506632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hanna Demelash Desyibelew, Mulat Tirfie Bayih, Adhanom Gebreegziabher Baraki, Abel Fekadu Dadi

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyMalnutritionSevere Acute MalnutritionMeta-analysisMedicinePediatricsIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Globally, Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) has been reduced by only 11% over the past 20 years and continues to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. So far, in Sub-Saharan Africa, several primary studies have been conducted on recovery rate and determinants of recovery from SAM in under-five children. However, comprehensive reviews that would have a shred of strong evidence for designing interventions are lacking. So, this review and meta-analysis was conducted to bridge this gap. METHODS: A systematic review of observational studies published in the years between 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2018 was conducted following the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement. Two reviewers have been searched and extracted data from CINAHL (EBSCO), MEDLINE (via Ovid), Emcare, PubMed databases, and Google scholar. Articles' quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale by two independent reviewers, and only studies with fair to good quality were included in the final analysis. The review presented the pooled recovery rate from SAM and an odds ratio of risk factors affecting recovery rate after checking for heterogeneity and publication bias. The review has been registered in PROSPERO with protocol number CRD42019122085. RESULT: Children with SAM from 54 primary studies (n = 140,148) were included. A pooled rate of recovery was 71.2% (95% CI: 68.5-73.8; I2 = 98.9%). Children who received routine medication (Pooled Odds ratio (POR):1.85;95% CI: 1.49-2.29; I2 = 0.0%), older age (POR: 1.99;95% CI: 1.29-3.08; I2 = 80.6%), and absence of co-morbidity (POR:3.2;95% CI: 2.15-4.76; I2 = 78.7%) had better odds of recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggestes HIV infected children had lower recovery rate from SAM (POR; 0.19; 95% CI: 0.09-0.39; I2 = 42.9%) compared to those non-infected. CONCLUSION: The meta-analysis deciphers that the pooled recovery rate was below the SPHERE standard, and further works would be needed to improve the recovery rate. So, factors that were identified might help to revise the plan set by the countries, and further research might be required to explore health fascilities fidelity to the WHO SAM management protocol.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.041
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.136 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207