Double Burden of Malnutrition in Under-Five Children (NFHS-5 Data) Using Extended CIAF: WHO 2006 Growth Standard Versus 2019 Indian Growth References.

IF 1.7 4区医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS

Indian pediatrics Pub Date : 2025-04-02 DOI:10.1007/s13312-025-00027-3

Nimisha S Dange, Vaman Khadilkar, Ketan Gondhalekar, Anuradha V Khadilkar

{"title":"Double Burden of Malnutrition in Under-Five Children (NFHS-5 Data) Using Extended CIAF: WHO 2006 Growth Standard Versus 2019 Indian Growth References.","authors":"Nimisha S Dange, Vaman Khadilkar, Ketan Gondhalekar, Anuradha V Khadilkar","doi":"10.1007/s13312-025-00027-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To compare the double burden of malnutrition (DBM) in under-five children using extended composite index of anthropometric failure (eCIAF) using WHO 2006 and 2019 Indian standards.Methods: Data of 2,32,920 under-five children as per National Family Health Survey-5 were eligible for inclusion. Incomplete records and extreme z-scores were excluded. eCIAF categories included: A No failure; B Wasted; C Wasted + Underweight; D Wasted + Stunted + Underweight; E Stunted + Underweight; F Stunted; G Stunted + Overweight; H Overweight; Y Underweight; Underfailure (UF): A + B + C + D + E + F + Y; Overfailure (OF): G + H.Results: Records of 1,96,015 under-five children were analyzed. 50.1% versus 74% children were categorized as no failure using WHO and Indian standards, respectively (P < 0.001). Prevalence of DBM, UF and OF using WHO reference was significantly higher than using Indian references [49.9% vs. 26%; 48.4% vs. 24.7%; 3.5% vs. 1.9%, respectively].Conclusion: Using Indian references prevents misclassification of DBM in under-fives.","PeriodicalId":13291,"journal":{"name":"Indian pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-025-00027-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the double burden of malnutrition (DBM) in under-five children using extended composite index of anthropometric failure (eCIAF) using WHO 2006 and 2019 Indian standards.

Methods: Data of 2,32,920 under-five children as per National Family Health Survey-5 were eligible for inclusion. Incomplete records and extreme z-scores were excluded. eCIAF categories included: A No failure; B Wasted; C Wasted + Underweight; D Wasted + Stunted + Underweight; E Stunted + Underweight; F Stunted; G Stunted + Overweight; H Overweight; Y Underweight; Underfailure (UF): A + B + C + D + E + F + Y; Overfailure (OF): G + H.

Results: Records of 1,96,015 under-five children were analyzed. 50.1% versus 74% children were categorized as no failure using WHO and Indian standards, respectively (P < 0.001). Prevalence of DBM, UF and OF using WHO reference was significantly higher than using Indian references [49.9% vs. 26%; 48.4% vs. 24.7%; 3.5% vs. 1.9%, respectively].

Conclusion: Using Indian references prevents misclassification of DBM in under-fives.

查看原文本刊更多论文

使用扩展CIAF的五岁以下儿童营养不良的双重负担（NFHS-5数据）：世卫组织2006年增长标准与2019年印度增长参考。

目的：采用世卫组织2006年和2019年印度标准，使用扩展人体测量失败综合指数（eCIAF）比较五岁以下儿童的营养不良双重负担。方法：纳入符合国家家庭健康调查-5的2,32,920名五岁以下儿童的数据。排除不完整记录和极端z分数。eCIAF分类包括：A无故障；B浪费;C浪费+体重不足；D消瘦+发育不良+体重不足；E发育不良+体重不足；F发育不良;G发育不良+超重；H超重;Y体重不足;欠失效（UF）： A + B + C + D + E + F + Y；过故障（OF）： G + H。结果：对1 96015名5岁以下儿童病历进行分析。根据WHO和印度的标准，分别有50.1%和74%的儿童被归类为无失败(P结论：使用印度的参考文献可以防止五岁以下儿童DBM的错误分类。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Indian pediatrics 医学-小儿科

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

8.70%

发文量

344

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The general objective of Indian Pediatrics is "To promote the science and practice of Pediatrics." An important guiding principle has been the simultaneous need to inform, educate and entertain the target audience. The specific key objectives are: -To publish original, relevant, well researched peer reviewed articles on issues related to child health. -To provide continuing education to support informed clinical decisions and research. -To foster responsible and balanced debate on controversial issues that affect child health, including non-clinical areas such as medical education, ethics, law, environment and economics. -To achieve the highest level of ethical medical journalism and to produce a publication that is timely, credible and enjoyable to read.