MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084048238 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.24.25336561

Spatiotemporal Trends in Malnutrition-related Hospitalization and Mortality Among Brazilian Children Under Five

2025· preprint· en· W7084048238 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSunflower and Safflower Cultivation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMalnutritionContext (archaeology)OddsSustainable developmentHealth careOdds ratioHospital admission

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigates annual hospital admissions and deaths due to malnutrition among Brazilian children under five from 2008 to 2024, analyzing spatial and temporal disparities across microregions and states. Using data from Brazil’s Hospital Information System (SIH), we applied a joint Bayesian spatiotemporal model to examine trends and assess five policy scenarios projected through 2030 in the context of Sustainable Development Goal 2 (SDG2): end all forms of malnutrition by 2030. Results reveal persistent regional inequalities, with the North and Northeast bearing the highest burdens, reflecting deep-rooted structural disparities. Key risk factors included pediatric bed availability (RR 1.13, 95% CrI 1.08–1.18), illiteracy, and low income. The National Hospital Care Policy (PNHOSP) contributed to reduced hospitalizations (RR 0.94, 95% CrI 0.89–0.99), but presented a borderline association with higher odds of death (OR 1.26, 95% CrI 0.98–1.58). Projections suggest that, under current conditions, Brazil is unlikely to meet SDG2 by 2030. Targeted investments in pediatric care infrastructure, combined with broader improvements in the social determinants of health, will be essential to mitigate severe malnutrition outcomes and reduce preventable deaths.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicSunflower and Safflower CultivationFrench-language works237,207