Evidence Hub

Not water, sanitation and hygiene practice, but timing of stunting is associated with recovery from stunting at 24 months: results from a multi-country birth cohort study

Subhasish Das, S. M. Fahim, Md. Ashraful Alam, M. Mahfuz, P. Bessong, E. Mduma, M. Kosek, S. Shrestha et al.

Public Health Nutrition, 2020

612 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objectives: To measure the role of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) practices on recovery from stunting and assess the role of timing of stunting on the reversal of this phenomenon Design: Data from the MAL-ED multi-country birth cohort study was used for the current analysis. Generalised linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate the probability of reversal of stunting with WASH practice and timing of stunting as the exposures of interest. Setting: Seven different countries across three continents. Participants: A total of 612 children <2 years of age. Results: We found that not WASH practice but timing of stunting had statistically significant association with recovery from stunting. In comparison with the children who were stunted at 6 months, children who were stunted at 12 months had 1·9 times (β = 0·63, P = 0·03) more chance of recovery at 24 months of age. And, children who were stunted at 18 months of age even had higher odds (adjusted OR = 3·01, β = 1·10, P < 0·001) of recovery than children who were stunted at 6 months. Additionally, mother’s height (β = 0·59, P = 0·04) and household income (β = 0·02, P < 0·05) showed statistically significant associations with the outcome. Conclusions: The study provided evidence for the role of timing of stunting on the recovery from the phenomenon. This novel finding indicates that the programmes to promote linear growth should be directed at the earliest possible timepoints in the course of life.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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: 612 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