| Literature DB >> 24073617 |
Noah Scovronick1, Zaid Chalabi, Paul Wilkinson.
Abstract
Undernutrition modeling makes it possible to evaluate the potential impact of such events as a food-price shock or harvest failure on the prevalence and severity of undernutrition. There are, however, uncertainties in such modeling. In this paper we discuss four methodological issues pertinent to impact estimation: (1) the conventional emphasis on energy intake rather than dietary quality; (2) the importance of the distribution of nutrient intakes; (3) the timing of both the 'food shock' and when the response is assessed; and (4) catch-up growth and risk accumulation.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24073617 PMCID: PMC3852289 DOI: 10.1186/1742-7622-10-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Emerg Themes Epidemiol ISSN: 1742-7622
Common indicators of undernutrition, defined as an inadequacy of energy and/or other nutrients
| Undernourishment | Estimates of ‘undernourishment’ are compiled annually by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) for all developing countries. The estimates aim to identify the proportion of a population at risk of hunger, and therefore is more a measure of food security than health status. |
| The FAO model assumes that the proportion of the population with mean energy consumption below a certain level is undernourished, and that the number below this threshold is estimable by assuming either a skew-normal or lognormal distribution of energy consumption defined by the population average and a coefficient of variation (FAO Statistics Division, [ | |
| An important characteristic of the undernourishment model is that it is a population-based estimate. The measure is unfeasible for individual-level assessment; determining individual energy requirements would require long-term information on energy intake, physical activity and other factors such as pre-existing disease (e.g. diarrhea). Therefore, undernutrition at the level of the individual is normally determined using growth-based measures, and population surveys of growth faltering are preferable in determining the prevalence or incidence of undernutrition (see below). | |
| Growth faltering | A common outcome of poor nutrition is faltered growth. Growth faltering is determined by comparing anthropometric measurements to international standards. Commonly used metrics of growth faltering include stunting (low height-for-age), wasting (low weight-for-height) and underweight (low weight-for-age). All three metrics are strongly associated with increased mortality from infectious disease and all-cause mortality [ |
| A model developed by Smith and Haddad [ | |
| A newly developed model by Lloyd et al. [ | |
| Micronutrient deficiency | Micronutrient adequacy is measured in a variety of ways, including direct measurement (e.g. blood levels), analyzing dietary intake, or using the prevalence of related diseases [ |
| Micronutrients of primary concern include zinc (associated with infectious disease and stunting), vitamin A (linked to blindness, childhood infections, and child mortality), iron (deficiency is the leading global cause of anaemia) and iodine (associated with thyroid function and cognitive development). | |
| Dietary diversity | Dietary diversity – defined as the number of distinct foods consumed over a given reference period – can be measured using household survey methods. Dietary diversity has been associated with nutritional status in a range of settings, but is not itself a health outcome (it is an exposure) [ |
| The Lives Saved Tool | The Lives Saved Tool was developed to estimate the potential impact on mortality of a range of different maternal and child health interventions [ |
Impact of a 15% increase in median income on intake (%) of select nutrients
| Calories (energy) | −0.043† | −0.6 |
| Vitamin A | 1.244* | +18.7 |
| Vitamin C | 1.040* | +15.6 |
| Iron | −0.378* | −5.7 |
| Zinc | −0.184* | −2.8 |
‡From Skoufias et al. [21], estimated at the 50th percentile using quantile regression. We note that Skoufias et al. reported that elasticities differed depending on the population subgroup and the estimation technique. †Not significant (10% level). *Significant (1% level).
Intake changes and percent deficient calculated using 1) a single population elasticity and 2) expenditure-stratified elasticities
*Deficiency was estimated using the fixed cut-point method, with the minimum requirement set at 37.5 μg of retinol equivalents. †All elasticities are from Skoufias et al. (2009) [21]. The authors presented multiple elasticities for the population based on different estimation techniques. This estimate was chosen because it is one preferred by the authors and is most coherent with the quartile estimates. ‡This row is the simple average of the four quartiles.
Figure 1Four potential responses to food price inflation. See text for detailed explanation of each model.
Figure 2Three possible models to represent catch-up growth and/or risk reversibility. See text for detailed explanation of each model. Hazard ratios (HR) are based on Olofin et al. [56].