Estimating the Double Burden of Malnutrition among 595,975 Children in 65 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys
1
School of Social Sciences and Psychology, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW 2571, Australia
2
School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
3
United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund, Lalitpur 44600, Nepal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(16), 2886; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162886
Submission received: 21 June 2019
/
Revised: 6 August 2019
/
Accepted: 7 August 2019
/
Published: 13 August 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Global Health)
Abstract
Introduction: Given the changing global nutrition landscape, the double burden of malnutrition is a major public health challenge in many developing countries. The main aim of this study is to estimate the double burden of malnutrition among children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This study used cross-sectional data from Demographic and Health Surveys (2001–2016). A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the prevalence of malnutrition indicators in 595,975 children under five years from 65 LMICs. Significant heterogeneity was detected among the various surveys (I2 >50%), hence a random-effect model was used. Sensitivity analysis was also performed, to examine the effects of outliers. Results: The pooled estimate for stunting, wasting, underweight, and overweight/obesity was 29.0%, 7.5%, 15.5%, and 5.3% respectively. Countries with the highest coexistence of undernutrition and overweight/obesity were: South Africa (stunting 27.4% (95% CI: 25.1, 29.8); overweight/obesity 13.3% (95% CI: 11.5, 15.2)), Sao Tome and Principe (stunting 29.0% (95% CI: 26.8, 31.4); overweight/obesity 10.5% (95% CI: 9.0, 12.1)), Swaziland (stunting 28.9% (95% CI: 27.3, 30.6); overweight/obesity 10.8% (95% CI: 9.7, 12.0)), Comoros (stunting 30.0% (95% CI: 28.3, 31.8); overweight/obesity 9.3% (95% CI: 8.3, 10.5)), and Equatorial Guinea (stunting 25.9% (95% CI: 23.4, 28.7); overweight/obesity 9.7% (95% CI: 8.0, 11.6)). Conclusions: There is an urgent need to strengthen existing policies on child malnutrition to integrate and scale up opportunities for innovative approaches which address the double burden of malnutrition in children under five years in LMICs.
1. Introduction
Child malnutrition in all its forms is a major public health challenge in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Malnutrition refers to a lack of proper nutrition either from insufficient nutrient and/or energy intake (undernutrition) or excessive nutrients and/or energy intake (overnutrition). Undernutrition and overnutrition have different effects on the child’s development and cognitive performance. Child undernutrition including stunting, wasting, and underweight adversely affects survival, physical and cognitive development, and reproductive and economic productivity of individuals as well as increasing susceptibility to acute and chronic diseases in adulthood [1,2].
However, childhood undernutrition is closely linked to overweight and obesity later in life. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), children who have suffered from undernutrition and were born with low birthweight or stunted are at far greater risk of being overweight and obese when faced with energy-dense diets and a sedentary lifestyle later in life [3]. Childhood overnutrition negatively affects a child’s physical health, and social and emotional well-being resulting in low self-esteem, depression, and social isolation as well as obesity-related medical conditions including liver disease, sleep apnea, type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and asthma and other respiratory problems [4]. Most LMICs experience the co-existence of both undernutrition and overnutrition in the same population. This phenomenon, popularly known as the “double burden” of malnutrition, is rapidly gaining global attention, especially in LMICs [5,6], hence, the need for action plans that target both undernutrition and overnutrition simultaneously.
The WHO double-duty actions aim to integrate and harness the synergetic effect of multiple interventions, programs, and policies to simultaneously address the burden of both undernutrition and overnutrition as well as diet-related noncommunicable diseases [7]. The approach recommends the adoption of multisectoral approaches combining nutrition-specific (addressing immediate causes of undernutrition) and nutrition-sensitive (addressing underlying causes of undernutrition) interventions to effect a more holistic sustainable response to mitigate the short- and long-term effects of the double burden of undernutrition [8,9].
Therefore, to properly operationalize the WHO double-duty actions and maximize pre-existing policies linked to nutrition in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), baseline data on the double burden of child malnutrition are urgently needed, especially in LMICs. Hence, the aim of this study is to estimate the double burden of malnutrition among children under five years in LMICs to identify high-priority countries for implication of the WHO double-duty actions, thus making proper use of limited resources.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Sources
This study used data from the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) of 65 LMICs. The datasets are publicly available from the DHS website [10]. DHS are population-based and nationally representative surveys with high response rates (>90%). The surveys are comparable across countries and have large sample sizes (usually between 5000 and 30,000 households). The households were selected using a multistage cluster sampling method. Three core questionnaires are used in DHS surveys: A household questionnaire, a women’s questionnaire, and a men’s questionnaire. Eligible participants in all households were women and men aged 15 ± 49 years. Details on data collection and sampling methodology employed by DHS are described elsewhere [10]. Only countries with DHS post-2000 AD were included in the analysis in order to capture the double burden of malnutrition from the introduction of the millennium development goals (MDGs).
2.2. Outcome Variable
Child malnutrition was measured by stunting, wasting, underweight, and overweight/obesity in children under five years. The DHS manual [11] indicates that the age of the child was determined from the date of interview and the date of birth of each child. Weight was measured using SECA digital scales and recorded in kilograms (kg) to the nearest 0.1 kg. The height was measured using a wooden support board (Shorr Board) and recorded in centimeter (cm) to the nearest 0.1 cm. Children <2 years or <85 cm were measured lying down (length) and those ≥2 years ≥85 cm were measured standing up (height). Stunting, underweight, and wasting were defined as height-for-age, weight-for-age, and weight-for-height <−2 standard deviations of the 2006 WHO Standard Growth Reference. Overweight/obesity was defined as weight-for-height >2 standard deviations [12]. For countries with DHS data prior to 2006, the anthropometric indicators were recalculated using WHO growth standards [12]. Stunting was used as the key indicator for monitoring child undernutrition as endorsed by the World Health Assembly (WHA) [13].
2.3. Statistical Analysis
Analyses were performed using Stata version 14.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). The syntax “metaprop” was used to generate forest plots for each of the malnutrition indicators. Each forest plot showed the prevalence of an indicator in individual countries, its associated 95% confidence intervals (CI), and corresponding weight. A test of heterogeneity of the DHS data obtained for the different countries showed a high level of inconsistency (I2 > 50%), hence a random-effect model [14] was used in the meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the effect of outliers by using a method similar to that employed by Patsopoulos and colleagues [15] which involves comparing the pooled prevalence before and after elimination of one country at a time.
3. Results
Table 1 shows the malnutrition indicators for 595,975 children under-5 years in 65 LMICs.
3.1. Stunting
Figure 1 shows a forest plot of the prevalence of stunting among children under 5 years in LMICs. The pooled estimate for stunting was 29.0% (95% CI: 26.2, 31.9). Countries with the highest prevalence were: Burundi 56.0% (95% CI: 54.8, 57.2), Madagascar 50.0% (95% CI: 48.7, 51.3), Guatemala 47.0% (95% CI: 46.1, 47.9), Timor-Leste 46.0% (95% CI: 44.8, 47.2), Yemen 46.0% (95% CI: 45.2, 46.8), Pakistan 45.0% (95% CI: 43.3, 46.7), Niger 44.0% (95% CI: 42.7, 45.3), Mozambique 43.0% (95% CI: 42.1, 43.9), Democratic Republic of Congo 43.0% (95% CI: 41.9, 44.0) and Chad 40.0% (95% CI: 39.1, 40.9). While countries with the lowest prevalence were: Samoa 5.0% (95% CI: 4.2, 5.9), Dominican Republic 7.0% (95% CI: 6.2, 7.9), Jordan 8.0% (95% CI: 7.3, 8.7), Moldova 8.0% (95% CI: 6.7, 9.5), Armenia 9.0% (95% CI: 7.6, 10.5).
3.2. Wasting
Figure 2 shows a forest plot of the prevalence of wasting among children under 5 years in LMICs. The pooled estimate for wasting was 7.5% (95% CI: 5.8, 9.1). Wasting was highest in Timor-Leste 24.0% (95% CI: 23.0, 25.0), India 21.0% (95% CI: 20.1, 21.2), Nigeria 18.0% (95% CI: 17.5, 18.5), Niger 18.0% (95% CI: 17.0, 19.1), Yemen 16.3% (95% CI: 15.7, 16.9), Burkina Faso 15.50% (95% CI: 14.7, 16.4), Sri Lanka 15.1% (95% CI: 14.3, 15.9), Bangladesh 14.3% (95% CI: 13.5, 15.1), Chad 13% (95% CI: 12.4, 13.7) and Eritrea 12.6% (95% CI: 9.9, 12.4). Wasting was lowest in Honduras 0.4% (95% CI: 0.3, 0.6), Peru 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5, 0.8), Guatemala 0.7% (95% CI: 0.6, 0.9), Turkey 0.7% (95% CI: 0.5, 1.0), Bolivia 1.4% (95% CI: 1.2, 1.7), Dominican Republic 2.0% (95% CI: 1.6, 2.5), Kazakhstan 1.8% (95% CI: 0.9, 3.2), and Nicaragua 2.0% (95% CI: 1.7, 2.4).
3.3. Underweight
Figure 3 shows a forest plot of the prevalence of underweight among children under 5 years in LMICs. The pooled estimate for underweight was 15.5% (95% CI: 12.3, 18.7). Timor-Leste 40.4% (95% CI: 39.2, 41.6), Eritrea 39.6% (95% CI: 38.3%, 40.9), Yemen 39% (95% CI: 38.2, 39.8), Niger 36.4% (95% CI: 35.1, 37.7), India 35.7% (95% CI: 35.5, 35.9), Bangladesh 32.6% (95% CI: 31.5, 33.7), Mauritania 31.8% (95% CI: 30.3, 33.4), Pakistan 30% (95% CI: 28.5, 31.6), Burundi 29.3% (95% CI: 28.2, 30.4) and Nigeria 28.7% (95% CI: 28.2, 29.3) reported the highest prevalence for underweight. Paraguay 0.3% (95% CI: 0.14, 0.54), Armenia 2.6% (95% CI: 1.9, 3.5), Samoa 2.7% (95% CI: 2.1, 3.4), Jordan 3.0% (95% CI: 2.6, 3.5), Peru 3.1% (95% CI: 2.8, 3.5), Kyrgyzstan 3.4% (95% CI: 2.9, 3.9), Dominican Republic 3.8% (95% CI: 3.2, 4.5), Turkey 3.9% (95% CI: 3.3, 4.6) and Bolivia 4.3% (95% CI: 3.9, 4.8) reported the lowest prevalence for underweight.
3.4. Overweight/Obesity
Figure 4 shows a forest plot of the prevalence of overweight/obesity among children under 5 years in LMICs. The pooled estimate for overweight/obesity was 5.3% (95% CI: 4.9, 5.8). Countries with the highest prevalence were: Albania 21.7% (95% CI: 19.5, 24.1), Azerbaijan 12.9% (95% CI: 11.4, 14.1), South Africa 13.3% (95% CI; 11.5, 15.2), Armenia 13.6% (95% CI: 11.9, 15.4), Sao Tomo and Principe 10.5% (95% CI: 9.0, 12.1). While childhood overweight/obesity was lowest in Senegal 0.9% (95% CI: 0.7, 1.2), Nepal 1.2% (95% CI: 0.8, 1.7). Myanmar 1.3% (95% CI: 0.9, 1.7), Burundi 1.4 (95% CI: 1.1, 1.7), Bangladesh 1.4% (95% CI: 1.1, 1.7), and Togo 1.9% (95% CI: 1.5, 2.4).
4. Discussion
This study estimated the double burden of child malnutrition in LMICs. Countries with the highest burden of child undernutrition were Timor-Leste, Burundi, Yemen, Nigeria, Madagascar, India, Guatemala, Niger, and Eritrea. Child undernutrition has consequences on morbidity, mortality, human capital development, and economic productivity [16]. Research has shown that most LMICs experience shortage in food supply [17,18,19], environmental challenges such as drought and climate change [20], harmful economic systems, conflict, and limited access to land for agricultural purposes [21] and these could adversely affect agricultural productivity, food security, and child nutrition [22]. Child nutritional status could also be adversely influenced by socio-economic, demographic and agro-ecological factors such as rising cost of living, rapid population growth and desertification [23,24,25], which are prevalent in most LMICs.
Countries with the highest burden of child overweight/obesity were Albania, Azerbaijan, Sao Tomo and Principe, South Africa, and Armenia. The food environment has been a primary driver of the rise in childhood overweight/obesity worldwide over the past half-century [26,27]. Studies have shown that changes in global diets and the global food system due to globalization and trade liberalization could have an adverse effect on nutrition in LMICs [27,28]. Global trade could influence food systems, particularly the availability, accessibility, and affordability of nutritious food, which may lead to the uptake of nutritionally deficient food [27,28].
Countries experiencing the highest coexistence of child undernutrition and overweight/obesity were South Africa, Sao Tome and Principe, Swaziland, Comoros, and Equatorial Guinea.
Optimal child nutrition is a key determinant in achieving global health targets. The growing double burden of malnutrition in LMICs presents a major global public health concern, which, if not properly addressed, might prevent the SDGs from being met. Existing nutrition interventions mostly target single forms of malnutrition [29] and this may lead to slow achievement of the global nutrition target as observed within most LMICs. With limited fiscal and human resources, it becomes necessary to identify opportunities where reduction in multiple forms of malnutrition could be achieved with single interventions. Therefore, policy, programs, and interventions which open effective channels that focus on the simultaneous reduction of both undernutrition and overweight can help accelerate progress in achieving the SDGs. This is the potential of “double-duty actions” [7].
As highlighted in the United Nations Decade of Action on Nutrition 2016–2025 [7], the integrated approach adopted in the double-duty actions leverage on the coexistence of multiple forms of malnutrition and has the potential to address the double burden of child malnutrition via three pathways. First, the “do no harm” approach ensures that current policies, programs and interventions addressing one form of child malnutrition are not inadvertently increasing the risk of other forms of malnutrition. This is mostly observed when interventions targeted at reducing acute child undernutrition through improvement of child feeding practices inadvertently increases a child’s susceptibility to long-term risks of overweight. The primary concern this approach aims to address is the imbalance in the impact of nutrition interventions. Second, the “retrofit” approach which leverages on existing actions addressing single forms of malnutrition to simultaneously influence other forms of malnutrition. For instance, initiatives which target exclusive breastfeeding in the first 6 months of life could also address excessive maternal weight gain in the postpartum period, which in turn protects against obesity and some noncommunicable diseases later in life for both infant and mother [30]. This approach is cost-effective with a huge potential for double returns on existing initiatives. It also provides policymakers and program managers with more efficient and integrated action plans to address multiple forms of malnutrition. Finally, the third approach involves development of de-novo initiatives to proactively address the double burden of malnutrition building from identified shared drivers of different forms of malnutrition. This could involve identifying new initiatives targeting the most significant shared drivers of malnutrition in a particular country. Considering that the type of initiative deployed and its effectiveness will vary between and within countries depending on each country’s unique local epidemiology, policy, cultural, environmental, and food contexts, therefore, to advance the potential of double-duty actions in countries, it is vital to assess existing national policies and evaluate their impact on outcomes associated with both undernutrition and overnutrition.
This study had some strength. First, the DHS are nationally representative and population-based surveys with large sample sizes. Second, the variables used by DHS are comparable across all countries [10]. However, this study also had some limitations. First, some LMICs were not included because they either had no DHS data or had no comprehensive data on the malnutrition indicators or their DHS was post-2000 AD. Second, the estimation of child nutritional status was limited to weight and height, with limited data on more detailed components of nutritional status, such as body composition or biochemical or metabolic status. Third, due to the difference in years of survey, the results are not comparable for present conditions in some nations.
5. Conclusions
The burden of child malnutrition varies within LMICs; therefore, interventions to address the double burden of malnutrition should be appropriate to the country setting. Such interventions should simultaneously target shared drivers of both undernutrition and overweight from shared platforms. Additionally, there is an urgent need to assess existing policies and their alignments with the Sustainable Development Goals 2 (Zero Hunger) and 3 (Good Health and Well-Being), and to evaluate impact, dissemination strategies, and scaling up opportunities of innovative approaches to prevent the double burden of child malnutrition in LMICs.
Author Contributions
A.M.N.R. and B.J.A. conceptualized the study. B.J.A. conducted the analysis, drafted, and revised the manuscript. A.M.N.R. contributed to the supervision and revision of the study. S.C. and B.W.S. edited the manuscript and enhanced its intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- UNICEF. Improving Child Nutrition: The Achievable Imperative for Global Progress; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Calkins, K.; Devaskar, S.U. Fetal origins of adult disease. Curr. Probl. Pediatr. Adolesc. Health Care 2011, 41, 158–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization. Guideline: Assessing and Managing Children at Primary Health-Care Facilities to Prevent Overweight and Obesity in the Context of the Double Burden of Malnutrition; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Sahoo, K.; Sahoo, B.; Choudhury, A.K.; Sofi, N.Y.; Kumar, R.; Bhadoria, A.S. Childhood obesity: Causes and consequences. J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care 2015, 4, 187. [Google Scholar]
- Shrimpton, R.; Rokx, C. Health, Nutrition and Population (HNP) Discussion Paper. In The Double Burden of Malnutrition: A Review of Global Evidence; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; Available online: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/905651468339879888/The-double-burden-of-malnutrition-a-review-of-global-evidence (accessed on 12 August 2019).
- Winichagoon, P.; Margetts, B.M. The Double Burden of Malnutrition in Low-and Middle-Income Countries. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-double-burden-of-malnutrition-in-low-and-Winichagoon-Margetts/99285f41a7b34b0460e2b46739d223766929c1a0 (accessed on 12 August 2019).
- WHO. Double-Duty Actions: Policy Brief; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- The World Bank. Improving Nutrition through Multi-Sectoral Approaches; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Children’s Fund. UNICEF’s Approach to Scaling Up Nutrition for Mothers and Their Children; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- The DHS Program. Available online: http://dhsprogram.com/data/data-collection.cfm (accessed on 12 August 2019).
- DHS Methodological Reports 14. 2014. Available online: https://www.dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/MR16/MR16.pdf (accessed on 12 August 2019).
- De Onis, M. WHO Child Growth Standards: Length/Height-for-Age, Weight-for-Age, Weight-for-Length, Weight-for-Height and Body Mass Index-for-Age: Methods and Development; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- World Health Organization. Global Nutrition Monitoring Framework: Operational Guidance for Tracking Progress in Meeting Targets for 2025; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- DerSimonian, R.; Laird, N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control. Clin. Trials 1986, 7, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patsopoulos, N.A.; Evangelou, E.; Ioannidis, J.P. Sensitivity of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Proposed metrics and empirical evaluation. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2008, 37, 1148–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- O’Connell, S.A.; Smith, C. Economic growth and child undernutrition. Lancet Glob. Health 2016, 4, e901–e902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hackett, M.; Melgar-Quiñonez, H.A.; Âlvarez, M.C. Household food insecurity associated with stunting and underweight among preschool children in Antioquia, Colombia. Revis. Panam. Salud Pública 2009, 25, 506–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saxena, N.C. Hunger, under-nutrition and food security in India. In Poverty, Chronic Poverty and Poverty Dynamics, 1st ed.; Mehta, A.K., Bhide, S., Kumar, A., Shah, A., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 55–92. [Google Scholar]
- Mutisya, M.; Kandala, N.B.; Ngware, M.W.; Kabiru, C.W. Household food (in) security and nutritional status of urban poor children aged 6 to 23 months in Kenya. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- FAO. Regional Overview of Food Insecurity: African Food Security Prospects Brighter Than Ever; FAO: Accra, Ghana, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Salami, A.; Kamara, A.B.; Brixiova, Z. Smallholder Agriculture in East Africa: Trends, Constraints and Opportunities; African Development Bank: Tunis, Tunisia, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Gillespie, S.; van den Bold, M. Agriculture, Food Systems, and Nutrition: Meeting the Challenge. Glob. Chall. 2017, 1, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hollinger, F.; Staatz, J.M. Agricultural Growth in West Africa: Market and Policy Drivers; FAO/African Development Bank/ECOWAS: Rome, Italy, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Lopriore, C.; Muehlhoff, E. Food security and nutrition trends in West Africa—Challenges and the way forward. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Food-based Approaches for a Healthy Nutrition, Ouagadougou, Burkina-Faso, 23–28 September 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Bender, W.; Smith, M. Population food and nutrition. Popul. Bull. Wash. 1997, 51, 1–48. [Google Scholar]
- Ford, N.D.; Patel, S.A.; Narayan, K.V. Obesity in low-and middle-income countries: Burden, drivers, and emerging challenges. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2017, 38, 145–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Drewnowski, A.; Popkin, B.M. The nutrition transition: New trends in the global diet. Nutr. Rev. 1997, 55, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hawkes, C.; Thow, A.M. Implications of the Central America-Dominican Republic-free trade agreement for the nutrition transition in Central America. Revis. Panam. Salud Pública 2008, 24, 345–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization. Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Interventions and the Prevention of Diarrhoea. Biological, Behavioural and Contextual Rationale. Available online: https://www.who.int/elena/titles/bbc/wsh_diarrhoea/en/ (accessed on 12 August 2019).
- World Health Organization. Exclusive Breastfeeding to Reduce the Risk of Childhood Overweight and Obesity; Biological, Behavioural and Contextual Rationale; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014; Available online: http://www.who.int/elena/titles/bbc/breastfeeding_childhood_obesity/en/ (accessed on 12 August 2019).
Figure 1.
Prevalence of child stunting in LMICs.
Figure 2.
Prevalence of child wasting in LMICs.
Figure 3.
Prevalence of child underweight in LMICs.
Figure 4.
Prevalence of child overweight/obesity in LMICs.
Table 1.
Low- and middle-income Countries and their malnutrition indicators for children under 5 years.
Table 1.
Low- and middle-income Countries and their malnutrition indicators for children under 5 years.
| Country | DHS | No. of Children (N) | No. of Stunted Children | No. of Wasted Children | No. of Underweight Children | No. of Overweight/Obese Children |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Angola | 2015 | 7455 | 2803 | 365 | 1416 | 246 |
| Burkina Faso | 2010 | 6994 | 2448 | 1084 | 1797 | 168 |
| Burundi | 2016 | 6464 | 3620 | 330 | 1894 | 90 |
| Cameroon | 2011 | 5860 | 1934 | 328 | 856 | 363 |
| Chad | 2014 | 10,854 | 4342 | 1411 | 3126 | 271 |
| Comoros | 2012 | 2762 | 829 | 307 | 423 | 257 |
| Congo-Brazzaville | 2011 | 4591 | 1148 | 271 | 533 | 152 |
| Côte d’Ivoire | 2011 | 3581 | 1074 | 269 | 534 | 107 |
| DRC * | 2013 | 9030 | 3883 | 713 | 2041 | 370 |
| Equatorial Guinea | 2011 | 1094 | 284 | 34 | 61 | 106 |
| Eritrea | 2002 | 5466 | 2077 | 689 | 2165 | No data |
| Ethiopia | 2016 | 10,447 | 3970 | 1034 | 2465 | 293 |
| Gabon | 2012 | 3856 | 636 | 127 | 231 | 285 |
| Gambia | 2013 | 3372 | 843 | 388 | 546 | 91 |
| Ghana | 2014 | 2895 | 550 | 136 | 318 | 75 |
| Guinea | 2012 | 3531 | 1095 | 339 | 636 | 127 |
| Kenya | 2014 | 18,986 | 4936 | 759 | 2088 | 778 |
| Lesotho | 2014 | 1869 | 617 | 52 | 193 | 138 |
| Liberia | 2013 | 3520 | 1126 | 211 | 528 | 102 |
| Madagascar | 2008 | 5436 | 2718 | No data | No data | No data |
| Malawi | 2015 | 5752 | 2128 | 155 | 673 | 259 |
| Mali | 2012 | 4857 | 1846 | 617 | 1239 | 112 |
| Mozambique | 2011 | 10,313 | 4435 | 608 | 1537 | 763 |
| Namibia | 2013 | 2287 | 549 | 142 | 306 | 78 |
| Niger | 2012 | 5481 | 2412 | 987 | 1995 | 132 |
| Nigeria | 2013 | 26,190 | 9690 | 4714 | 7517 | 1048 |
| Rwanda | 2014 | 3813 | 1449 | 84 | 355 | 294 |
| São Tomé and Príncipe | 2008 | 1544 | 448 | 162 | 202 | 162 |
| Senegal | 2016 | 5722 | 973 | 412 | 772 | 51 |
| Sierra Leone | 2013 | 5094 | 1931 | 474 | 835 | 382 |
| South Africa | 2016 | 1401 | 384 | 35 | 83 | 186 |
| Swaziland | 2006 | 2940 | 850 | 74 | 159 | 318 |
| Tanzania | 2015 | 9848 | 3388 | 443 | 1349 | 355 |
| Togo | 2013 | 3282 | 903 | 213 | 525 | 62 |
| Uganda | 2016 | 5148 | 1488 | 180 | 541 | 190 |
| Zambia | 2013 | 12,328 | 2120 | 740 | 1825 | 703 |
| Zimbabwe | 2015 | 6352 | 1702 | 203 | 356 | 534 |
| Bolivia | 2008 | 8422 | 2282 | 118 | 362 | 716 |
| Dominican Republic | 2013 | 3619 | 253 | 72 | 138 | 264 |
| Guatemala | 2014 | 12,567 | 5906 | 88 | 1583 | 591 |
| Guyana | 2009 | 1522 | 274 | 81 | 160 | 94 |
| Haiti | 2016 | 6618 | 1456 | 245 | 629 | 225 |
| Honduras | 2011 | 10,167 | 2338 | 41 | 712 | 519 |
| Nicaragua | 2001 | 6277 | 1701 | 151 | 496 | 490 |
| Peru | 2014 | 9540 | 1431 | 57 | 296 | No data |
| Bangladesh | 2014 | 7318 | 2634 | 1046 | 2386 | 102 |
| India | 2015 | 219,796 | 83,522 | 46,157 | 78,467 | 4616 |
| Maldives | 2009 | 2513 | 477 | 266 | 435 | 148 |
| Myanmar | 2015 | 4088 | 1186 | 286 | 773 | 53 |
| Nepal | 2016 | 2422 | 872 | 235 | 654 | 29 |
| Sri Lanka | 2016 | 7865 | 1337 | 1188 | 1612 | 157 |
| Timor-Leste | 2016 | 6798 | 3127 | 1632 | 2746 | 374 |
| Albania | 2008 | 1289 | 245 | 117 | 67 | 280 |
| Armenia | 2015 | 1579 | 142 | 66 | 41 | 215 |
| Azerbaijan | 2006 | 1979 | 495 | 135 | 152 | 255 |
| Kyrgyzstan | 2012 | 4337 | 781 | 117 | 147 | 369 |
| Moldova | 2005 | 1522 | 170 | 102 | 50 | 137 |
| Tajikistan | 2012 | 5080 | 1321 | 503 | 615 | 300 |
| Turkey | 2013 | 3668 | 440 | 26 | 143 | No data |
| Jordan | 2012 | 5851 | 468 | 140 | 176 | 257 |
| Morocco | 2003 | 5682 | 1352 | 636 | 614 | 548 |
| Pakistan | 2012 | 3466 | 1560 | 374 | 1040 | 111 |
| Yemen | 2013 | 13,823 | 6359 | 2253 | 5391 | 276 |
| Cambodia | 2014 | 4893 | 1566 | 470 | 1169 | 98 |
| Samoa | 2014 | 2859 | 143 | 106 | 77 | 154 |
* DRC means Democratic Republic of Congo.
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
MDPI and ACS Style
Akombi, B.J.; Chitekwe, S.; Sahle, B.W.; Renzaho, A.M.N. Estimating the Double Burden of Malnutrition among 595,975 Children in 65 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2886. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162886
AMA Style
Akombi BJ, Chitekwe S, Sahle BW, Renzaho AMN. Estimating the Double Burden of Malnutrition among 595,975 Children in 65 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(16):2886. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162886
Chicago/Turabian StyleAkombi, Blessing J., Stanley Chitekwe, Berhe W. Sahle, and Andre M.N. Renzaho. 2019. "Estimating the Double Burden of Malnutrition among 595,975 Children in 65 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 16: 2886. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162886
APA StyleAkombi, B. J., Chitekwe, S., Sahle, B. W., & Renzaho, A. M. N. (2019). Estimating the Double Burden of Malnutrition among 595,975 Children in 65 Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Meta-Analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(16), 2886. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162886
Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
