MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4312641115 · doi:10.2196/39744

Understanding Child Wasting in Ethiopia: Cross-sectional Analysis of 2019 Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey Data Using Generalized Linear Latent and Mixed Models

2022· article· en· W4312641115 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Girma Gilano, Samuel Hailegebreal, Sewunet Sako, Firehiwot Haile, Kasarto Gilano, Binyam Tariku Seboka, Kefita Kashala

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWastingMalnutritionOddsCross-sectional studyMultilevel modelPublic healthEnvironmental healthMedicineLogistic regressionDemographyGerontologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Wasting is an immediate, visible, and life-threatening form of undernutrition in children aged <5 years. Within a short time, wasting causes recurrent sickness, delayed physical and mental growth, impatience, poor feeding, and low body weight. The long-term consequences of wasting and undernutrition are stunting, inability to learn, poor health status, and poor work performance. Wasting remains a public health problem in Ethiopia. According to the World Health Organization, countries have to reduce undernutrition including child wasting to below 5% by 2025. Ethiopia is attempting to attain national and international targets of undernutrition while struggling with many problems. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the prevalence and associated factors of wasting to provide information for further renewing policy commitments. METHODS: We used community-based, cross-sectional data from the Ethiopian Mini Demographic and Health Survey. The survey was conducted in 9 regions and 2 city administrations. Two-stage cluster sampling was used to recruit study participants. In the first stage, enumerations areas were selected, and 28-35 households per enumeration area were selected in the second stage. Our analysis included 2016 women with children aged <5 years from the 2019 EMDHS data set. We dropped incomplete records and included all women who fulfilled the eligibility criteria. We used multilevel ordinal regression using Generalized Linear Latent and Mixed Models (GLLAMM) and predicted probability with log-likelihood ratio tests. Fulfilling the proportional odds model's assumption during the application of multilevel ordinary logistic regression was a cumbersome task. GLLAMM enabled us to perform the multilevel proportional odds model using an alternative method. RESULTS: In our analysis, wasting was 7.68% (95% CI 6.56%-8.93%). Around 26.82% of mothers never used antenatal care for their current child. Most mothers (52.2%) did not have formal education, and 86.8% did not have postnatal care for their children. Additionally, half (50.93%) of the mothers have ≥6 household members. Wasting was associated with feeding diverse foods (coefficient 4.90, 95% CI 4.90-4.98), female sex of the household head (-40.40, 95% CI -40.41 to -40.32), home delivery (-35.51, 95% CI -35.55 to -35.47), first (16.66, 95% CI, 16.60-16.72) and second (16.65, 95% CI 16.60-16.70) birth order, female child (-12.65, 95% CI -12.69 to -12.62), and household size of 1 to 3 (10.86, 95% CI 10.80-10.92). CONCLUSIONS: According to the target set by World Health Organization for reducing undernutrition in children aged <5 years to below 5% by 2025, child wasting of 7.68% in Ethiopia should spark an immediate reaction from the government and stakeholders. Informed policy decisions, technology-based child-feeding education, and food self-sufficiency support could improve the current challenges. Additional effort is important to improve low maternal education, family planning, awareness of sex preferences, women empowerment, and maternal health services.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.285
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.110 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→