MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162669826 · doi:10.1101/2021.05.19.21257389

Determinants of stunting among children < 5 years of age: Evidence from 2018-2019 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey

2021· preprint· en· W3162669826 on OpenAlexaff
Bright Nkhoma, Wingston Ng’ambi, Peter J. Chipimo, Mowa Zambwe

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsWorkers Compensation Board of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropometryBreastfeedingDemographyMedicineResidenceLogistic regressionPublic healthEnvironmental healthBirth orderPediatricsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE The study aimed at identifying socio-economic and environmental factors that were associated with stunting among children aged 0-59 months in Zambia. BACKGOUND Hitherto, stunting continues to be a Public Health problem worldwide. A child is ‘stunted’ if his or her height is less than negative two standard deviations below the World Health Organization (WHO) standard. The study aimed to explore determinants of stunting in Zambia among children (< 5 years of age) using the Zambia Demographic and Health Survey (ZDHS) 2018-2019 database. METHODS A total of 7, 045 Zambian children with complete anthropometric measurements and aged 0–59 months were included in the study. Nutritional status was evaluated using anthropometric; height-for-age, as a proxy measure of stunting. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression were used to examine the association between stunting and selected environmental, maternal-socio-demographic and child level variables. RESULTS A total of 2, 479 children under the age of five found to be stunted representing a prevalence of 34.9%. Stunting was higher among male children as compared to female children (38.5% vs 31.3% respectively). Additional analysis revealed that children from households whose source of drinking water was improved (34%) were less likely to be stunted compared to children from households whose source of drinking water was non-improved (40%). Stunting was statistically significant associated with sex and age of a child; birth size; breastfeeding; residence; maternal education; wealth index; twin births and the birth interval among siblings. Children born to mothers whose previous birth interval is less than 24 months (aOR= 1.34 95%CI: 1.13-1.58; p<0.001), children from lower index households (aOR= 1.65 95%CI: 1.32-2.08; p<0.001), twin births (aOR=2.65 95%CI: 1.61-4.36; p<0.001), children whose mothers had primary education (aOR=1.16 95%CI 1.00-1.35; p=0.046), children coming from households whose source of drinking water was non-improved (aOR= 1.30 95%CI: 1.09-1.5: p=0.003), child not breastfed (aOR= 1.20 95%CI: 1.04-1.38; p=0.015) were more likely to be stunted. CONCLUSION The study established that the major predictors of stunting among children under 5 years old in Zambia were sex and age of the child; birth weight; maternal education; wealth status; source of drinking water; twin births, breastfeeding, residence and the birth interval among siblings. Therefore, to reduce the burden of stunting interventions that can address these factors are required such as community based education and targeted nutritional interventions. ARTICLE SUMMARY Strengths and limitations of the study The study utilised the ZDHS data as a proxy to establish the national burden of stunting in Zambia during 2018/2019, hence contributing to the body of knowledge. Many variables perataining to food intakes were not covered in ZDHS of 2018/2019 hence exluded from the study. Food intakes are very critical in measuring stunting levels.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207