Evidence Hub

Predictors of change in early child development among children with stunting: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial in Uganda

Joseph Mbabazi, Hannah Pesu, Rolland Mutumba, G. McCray, C. Ritz, S. Filteau, A. Briend, E. Mupere et al.

PLOS Global Public Health, 2024

750 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Millions of children under 5 years in low- and middle-income countries fail to attain their development potential with accruing short- and long-term consequences. Low length/height for age (stunting) is known to be a key factor, but there is little data on how child characteristics are linked with developmental changes among children with stunting. We assessed the socioeconomic, household, anthropometric, and clinical predictors of change in early child development (ECD) among 1–5-year-old children with stunting. This was a prospective cohort study nested in a randomized trial testing effects of lipid-based nutrient supplementation among children with stunting in Uganda. Development was assessed using the Malawi Development Assessment Tool (MDAT). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to assess for predictors of change. We included 750 children with mean ±SD age of 30.2 ±11.7 months 45% of whom were female. After 12 weeks, total MDAT z-score increased by 0.40 (95%CI: 0.32; 0.48). Moderate vs severe stunting, higher fat-free mass, negative malaria test and no inflammation (serum α-1-acid glycoprotein <1 g/l) at baseline predicted greater increase in ECD scores. Older age and fat mass gain predicted a lesser increase in ECD. Our findings reinforce the link between stunting and development with more severely stunted children having a lesser increase in ECD scores over time. Younger age, freedom from malaria and inflammation, and higher fat-free mass at baseline, as well…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 750 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free