Cochrane · systematic review · CD005039
Community‐based supplementary feeding for promoting the growth of children under five years of age in low and middle income countries
Sguassero, Y, de Onis, M, Bonotti, AM, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2012 · Cochrane Library
Developmental, Psychosocial and Learning ProblemsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
21
current version
GRADE rated
21
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 19%Low 12 · 57.1%Moderate 5 · 23.8%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation for children aged less than 24 months in low and middle income countries (LMIC)
Population: Children aged less than 24 months
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight (kg) at the end of the intervention Weight scale Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 460 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Lenght/height (cm) at the end of the intervention Measurement board Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 460 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation or placebo for children aged less than five years in LMIC
Population: Children aged less than five years in LMIC
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight gain (kg) during the intervention Weight scale Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 668 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Length/height gain (cm) at the end of the intervention Measurement board Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 795 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Weight‐for‐age z‐score at the end of the intervention Weight scale and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 308 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Lenght/height‐for‐age z‐score at the end of the intervention Measurement board and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 308 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Weight‐for‐length/height z‐score at the end of the intervention Weight scale, measurement boards and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 260 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation for children older than 24 months in LMIC
Population: Children older than 24 months
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Change in weight‐for‐age z‐score during the intervention Weight scale and and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 348 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Change in length/height z‐score during the intevention Measurement board and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 348 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation for children aged less than five years with or without stunting or wasting in LMIC
Population: Children aged less than five years with or without stunting or wasting
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight (kg) at the end of the intervention Weight scale Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 460 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Length/height (cm) at the end of the intervention Measurement board Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 460 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation or placebo for children aged less than five years with or without stunting or wasting in LMIC
Population: Children aged less than five years with or without stunting/wasting in LMIC
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight‐for‐length/height z‐score at the end of the intervention Weight scale and measurement board Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 260 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation for ≤ 12 months in children aged less than five years in LMIC
Population: Children aged less than five years in LMIC
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight (kg) at the end of the intervention Weight scale Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 587 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Length/height (cm) at the end of the intervention Measurement board Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 587 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Weight gain (kg) during the intervention Weight scale Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 795 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Length/height gain (cm) at the end of the intervention Measurement board Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or low‐protein/kcalories supplementation | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 795 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation or placebo for ≤ 12 months in children aged less than five years in LMIC
Population: Children aged less than five years in LMIC
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Weight‐for‐age z‐score at the end of the intervention Weight scale and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 308 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Length/height‐for‐age z‐score at the end of the intervention Measurement board and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 308 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Weight‐for‐length/height z‐score at the end of the intervention Weight scale, measurement boards and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation or placebo | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 260 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Supplementary feeding compared to no food supplementation for ≤ 12 months in children aged less than five years in LMIC
Population: Children aged less than five years in LMIC
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Change in weight‐for‐age z‐core during the intervention Weight scale and and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 348 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Change in length/height z‐score during the intervention Measurement board and child growth reference Supplementary feeding vs no food supplementation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 348 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |