| Literature DB >> 30026945 |
Mark Myatt1, Tanya Khara2, Simon Schoenbuchner3, Silke Pietzsch4, Carmel Dolan2, Natasha Lelijveld5,6, André Briend7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Wasting and stunting are common. They are implicated in the deaths of almost two million children each year and account for over 12% of disability-adjusted life years lost in young children. Wasting and stunting tend to be addressed as separate issues despite evidence of common causality and the fact that children may suffer simultaneously from both conditions (WaSt). Questions remain regarding the risks associated with WaSt, which children are most affected, and how best to reach them.Entities:
Keywords: Anthropometry; Mortality; Multiple anthropometric deficits; Prevalence; Stunting; Wasting
Year: 2018 PMID: 30026945 PMCID: PMC6047117 DOI: 10.1186/s13690-018-0277-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Public Health ISSN: 0778-7367
Description of the survey database used in the analysis
| Datasetsa | Number of surveysa | 2426 surveys from 51 countries | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Country (number)b | Afghanistan (43), Albania (1), Angola (22), Bangladesh (28), Benin (7), Burkina Faso (55), Burundi (25), Cameroon (10), Central African Republic (58), Chad (243), Congo - Kinshasa (266), Cote d’Ivoire (49), Djibouti (14), Eritrea (4), Ethiopia (265), Gambia (8), Guatemala (2), Guinea (12), Guinea Bissau (13), Haiti (49), India (8), Indonesia (3), Jordan (4), Kenya (132), Liberia (55), Madagascar (4), Malawi (16), Mali (14), Mauritania (57), Mozambique (13), Myanmar (22), Nepal (15), Niger (38), Nigeria (107), Pakistan (18), Philippines (12), Rwanda (26), Senegal (7), Sierra Leone (58), Somalia (227), South Sudan (140), Sri Lanka (3), Sudan (144), Tajikistan (5), Tanzania (8), Thailand (2), Togo (18), Uganda (84), Yemen (5), Zambia (6), Zimbabwe (1) | ||
| Year of survey (number) | 1992 (3), 1993 (15), 1994 (35), 1995 (39), 1996 (27), 1997 (33), 1998 (21), 1999 (26), 2000 (39), 2001 (41), 2002 (55), 2003 (54), 2004 (76), 2005 (99), 2006 (70), 2007 (83), 2008 (143), 2009 (155) 2010 (201), 2011 (773), 2012 (261), 2013 (250) 2014 (340), 2015 (79), Unknown (7) | ||
| Agency (number) | ACF (802), CONCERN (108), FSNAU (207), GOAL (141), IMC (15), IRC (3), MSF (95), Plan International (2), SC (58), TDH (7), UNHCR (347), UNICEF (622), World Vision (18), Zerca y Lejos (1) | ||
| Childrenc | Number of children | 1,796,991 | |
| Sex | Males | 909,099 (50.6%) | |
| Females | 887,892 (49.4%) | ||
| Age | Minimum | 06 months | |
| 1st Quartile | 18 months | ||
| Median | 30 months | ||
| Mean | 31 months | ||
| 3rd Quartile | 44 months | ||
| Maximum | 59 months | ||
| Country (number)a | Afghanistan (47,813), Albania (892), Angola (17,191), Bangladesh (14,554), Benin (7841), Burkina Faso (41,467), Burundi (14,604), Cameroon (8530), Central African Republic (36,161), Chad (145,506), Congo (Kinshasa) (226,767), Cote d’Ivoire (23,990), Djibouti (5257), Eritrea (2281), Ethiopia (167,368), Gambia (6721), Guatemala (608), Guinea (9487), Guinea Bissau (7131), Haiti (39,465), India (5145), Indonesia (1735), Jordan (1517), Kenya (86,018), Liberia (32,686), Madagascar (3156), Malawi (15,998), Mali (10,901), Mauritania (36,617), Mozambique (4417), Myanmar (14,322), Nepal (8844), Niger (48,995), Nigeria (65,738), Pakistan (14,098), Philippines (6095), Rwanda (15,559), Senegal (8421), Sierra Leone (62,914), Somalia (234,982), South Sudan (96,225), Sri Lanka (2573), Sudan (114,113), Tajikistan (4297), Tanzania (5290), Thailand (1795), Togo (11,835), Uganda (54,236), Yemen (1781), Zambia (2364), Zimbabwe (690) | ||
aNumbers given do not include duplicate datasets
bSurveys were from emergency and refugees settings. The specified country of origin may not reflect the nationality or ethnicity of survey respondents
cNumbers given are for records remaining after the censoring of records with biologically implausible values using WHO flagging criteria
Fig. 1Venn diagram showing the relations between sets of children who are wasted, stunted and underweight in all 51 countries (n = 1,796,991)*. * Wasted (weight-for-height z-score < − 2.0), stunted (height-for-age z-score < − 2.0), and underweight (weight-for-age z-score < − 2.0) were defined using z-scores calculated using the WHO growth standards. The number of cases in each division is reported. The zero cell indicates that all WaSt cases were also underweight
Fig. 2Weight-for-age z-score (WAZ) at different ages for males and females aged between 6 and 59 months with WHZ = − 2.0 and HAZ = − 2.0 calculated using the WHO growth standards. All WaSt cases must also be underweight (i.e. present with WAZ < − 2.0)
Associationa between wasted and being stunted in 51 countries
| Country | Odds ratio [95% CI]b | Country | Odds ratio [95% CI]b |
|---|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan | 1.22 [1.14, 1.29] | Malawi | 1.03 [0.90, 1.17] |
| Albania | 0.78 [0.32, 1.89] | Mali | 1.53 [1.36, 1.73] |
| Angola | 1.37 [1.22, 1.53] | Mauritania | 1.35 [1.25, 1.45] |
| Bangladesh | 1.37 [1.24, 1.51] | Mozambique | 1.31 [1.02, 1.69] |
| Benin | 1.72 [1.45, 2.05] | Myanmar | 1.14 [1.03, 1.25] |
| Burkina Faso | 1.74 [1.63, 1.85] | Nepal | 1.62 [1.43, 1.85] |
| Burundi | 1.66 [1.45, 1.90] | Niger | 1.46 [1.38, 1.54] |
| Cameroon | 1.36 [1.17, 1.59] | Nigeria | 1.49 [1.41, 1.57] |
| Central African Republic | 1.59 [1.46, 1.73] | Pakistan | 1.00 [0.91, 1.11] |
| Chad | 1.31 [1.27, 1.35] | Philippines | 1.53 [1.26, 1.85] |
| Congo - Kinshasa | 0.99 [0.96, 1.02] | Rwanda | 1.13 [1.00, 1.27] |
| Cote d’Ivoire | 2.50 [2.24, 2.80] | Senegal | 1.76 [1.53, 2.04] |
| Djibouti | 1.31 [1.11, 1.54] | Sierra Leone | 1.42 [1.35, 1.50] |
| Eritrea | 0.87 [0.67, 1.13] | Somalia | 1.01 [0.98, 1.03] |
| Ethiopia | 1.19 [1.15, 1.22] | South Sudan | 1.05 [1.01, 1.09] |
| Gambia | 2.04 [1.73, 2.40] | Sri Lanka | 1.84 [1.49, 2.27] |
| Guatemala | 4.97 [0.61,40.62] | Sudan | 1.28 [1.24, 1.32] |
| Guinea | 1.71 [1.42, 2.06] | Tajikistan | 1.30 [1.07, 1.59] |
| Guinea Bissau | 2.33 [1.90, 2.85] | Tanzania | 1.17 [0.91, 1.49] |
| Haiti | 2.27 [2.06, 2.51] | Thailand | 1.45 [0.99, 2.12] |
| India | 1.41 [1.22, 1.63] | Togo | 2.01 [1.72, 2.35] |
| Indonesia | 1.45 [1.07, 1.97] | Uganda | 1.48 [1.38, 1.57] |
| Jordan | 3.42 [1.27, 9.23] | Yemen | 1.12 [0.72, 1.72] |
| Kenya | 0.93 [0.89, 0.97] | Zambia | 0.80 [0.53, 1.21] |
| Liberia | 1.41 [1.30, 1.53] | Zimbabwe | 1.11 [0.50, 2.47] |
| Madagascar | 1.86 [1.45, 2.38] | Pooled ORc | 1.40 [1.32, 1.49] |
aThe odds ratio (OR) is used here as a measure of the strength and direction of association because it is symmetrical (i.e. the OR for being wasted given stuntedness and the OR for being stunted given wastedness are identical). Use of the OR avoids the question of what comes before and what comes after, which is not answerable with cross-sectional data. OR > 1 is a positive association, OR = 1 is no association, and OR < 1 is a negative association. The distance of the OR from one is a measure of the strength of association
bIntervals (ranges) are expressed in ISO 31–11 form. The form [a,b] expresses the interval a ≤ x ≤ b. For example, [1.32,1.49] is used to represent a 95% confidence interval that ranges between 1.32 and 1.49
cEstimated using a random effects (DerSimonian-Laird) meta-analysis
Male to female WaSt prevalence ratio in 46 countriesa
| Country | M:F prevalence ratio [95% CI]b | Country | M:F prevalence ratio [95% CI]b |
|---|---|---|---|
| Afghanistan | 1.39 [1.28,1.50] | Malawi | 1.45 [1.23,1.71] |
| Angola | 1.60 [1.39,1.85] | Mali | 1.69 [1.40,2.05] |
| Bangladesh | 1.36 [1.20,1.53] | Mauritania | 1.70 [1.50,1.93] |
| Benin | 1.44 [1.12,1.85] | Mozambique | 2.00 [1.36,2.99] |
| Burkina Faso | 1.85 [1.70,2.03] | Myanmar | 1.45 [1.28,1.65] |
| Burundi | 1.49 [1.29,1.71] | Nepal | 1.36 [1.17,1.59] |
| Cameroon | 1.93 [1.56,2.40] | Niger | 1.49 [1.39,1.60] |
| Central African Republic | 1.57 [1.39,1.76] | Nigeria | 1.41 [1.32,1.51] |
| Chad | 1.59 [1.52,1.66] | Pakistan | 1.70 [1.48,1.95] |
| Congo - Kinshasa | 1.72 [1.65,1.80] | Philippines | 1.54 [1.19,2.01] |
| Cote d’Ivoire | 1.94 [1.66,2.26] | Rwanda | 1.44 [1.22,1.69] |
| Djibouti | 1.62 [1.27,2.07] | Senegal | 1.87 [1.48,2.37] |
| Eritrea | 1.70 [1.12,2.63] | Sierra Leone | 1.53 [1.42,1.66] |
| Ethiopia | 1.87 [1.78,1.97] | Somalia | 1.86 [1.78,1.94] |
| Gambia | 2.11 [1.63,2.76] | South Sudan | 1.73 [1.62,1.85] |
| Guinea | 1.66 [1.28,2.17] | Sri Lanka | 1.02 [0.76,1.37] |
| Guinea Bissau | 1.63 [1.21,2.21] | Sudan | 1.71 [1.62,1.79] |
| Haiti | 1.74 [1.51,1.99] | Tajikistan | 1.32 [0.99.1.77] |
| India | 1.12 [0.94,1.33] | Tanzania | 2.65 [1.80,3.98] |
| Indonesia | 1.35 [0.91,2.02] | Thailand | 1.46 [0.84,2.56] |
| Kenya | 1.74 [1.62,1.88] | Togo | 1.71 [1.35,2.18] |
| Liberia | 1.58 [1.41,1.77] | Uganda | 1.65 [1.50,1.82] |
| Madagascar | 2.47 [1.74,3.54] | Zambia | 1.17 [0.59,2.32] |
| Pooled PRc | 1.63 [1.60,1.65] |
aCountries with fewer than 30 WaSt cases (i.e. Albania, Guatemala, Jordan, Yemen, Zimbabwe) were excluded from this analysis
bIntervals (ranges) are expressed in ISO 31–11 form. The form [a,b] expresses the interval a ≤ x ≤ b. For example, [1.60,1.65] is used to represent a 95% confidence interval that ranges between 1.60 and 1.65
cCalculated using inverse variance-weighted average fixed effects (Cochran) meta-analysis
Fig. 3Male and female WaSt prevalence by age group in all 51 countries. Intervals (ranges) are expressed in ISO 31–11 form. The form (a, b) expresses the interval a < x ≤ b. For example, (17, 29) is used to represent the set {18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29} of ages in months. Year-centred age-groups are used. The form (a, b) expresses the interval a ≤ x ≤ b. For example, [1.69, 1.78] is used to represent a 95% confidence interval that ranges between 1.69 and 1.78
Sensitivity and specificity for detecting cases of WaSt at thresholds for WAZ and MUAC found using ROC analysis and Youden’s Index
| Case-definitiona | Sensitivity (%)b | Specificity (%)b |
|---|---|---|
| WAZ < − 2.6 | 98.47 [98.39, 98.56] | 91.07 [91.03, 91.11] |
| MUAC < 133 mm | 81.03 [80.76, 81.30] | 79.52 [79.46, 79.58] |
aThe case-definitions found using ROC analysis and Youden’s Index
bIntervals (ranges) are expressed in ISO 31–11 form. The form [a,b] expresses the interval a ≤ x ≤ b. For example, [98.39, 98.56] is used to represent a 95% confidence interval that ranges between 98.39 and 98.56%
Pooled hazard ratios for anthropometric status and all-cause mortality
| Anthropometric status | Hazard ratioa |
|---|---|
| Stunted only | 1.47 [1.21, 1.78] |
| Wasted only | 2.30 [1.47, 3.60] |
| Both wasted and stunted ( | 12.25 [7.67,19.58] |
aPooled hazard ratios and associated 95% confidence limits calculated using data from 10 prospective studies taken from Table 3 of McDonald CM et al. (2013) [16]. The category labelled “WaSt” is the same as the category “Wasted, stunted, and underweight” in McDonald CM et al. (2013)