Summary of findings: Lipid‐based nutrient supplements (full dose) vs Blended foods (full dose): Progression to SAM
Summary of findings: Lipid‐based nutrient supplements (full dose) showed no clear difference in progression to SAM compared with blended foods (full dose) (high certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings: Lipid‐based nutrient supplements (full dose) vs Blended foods (full dose) Progression to SAM · children with MAM Summary of findings: Lipid‐based nutrient supplements (full dose) showed no clear difference in progression to SAM compared with blended foods (full dose) (high certainty). Specially formulated foods for treating children with moderate acute malnutrition in low‐ and middle‐income… (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.88 [0.72, 1.07] | 3 studies · 4537 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Specially formulated foods for treating children with moderate acute malnutrition in low‐ and middle‐income countries 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.