↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between mid upper arm circumference and weight changes in children aged 6–59 months

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Public Health, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Relationship between mid upper arm circumference and weight changes in children aged 6–59 months
Published in
Archives of Public Health, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13690-015-0103-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Binns, Nancy Dale, Monsurul Hoq, Chrissy Banda, Mark Myatt

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to (i) describe the relationship between weight changes and MUAC changes in children aged between 6 and 59 months during treatment for SAM in CMAM programmes in three country contexts (Malawi, Ethiopia and Bangladesh) admitted using MUAC and (ii) describe the sensitivity of both MUAC and weight to episodes of disease experienced during the SAM treatment episodes in CMAM programmes in three country contexts (Malawi, Ethiopia and Bangladesh) admitted using MUAC. Data collected under research conditions in Malawi were analysed for the correlation between MUAC and weight changes using the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (Pearson's r). Further data from other CMAM programmes implemented under field conditions in Ethiopia and Bangladesh were similarly analysed. The association of growth failure following recent episodes of illness were assessed for MUAC and weight change using a two-by-two table, box-plots and Kruskal Wallis non-parametric rank sum test. MUAC and weight gain acheived over the entire treatment episode were strongly correlated in all three country contexts, Ethiopia (median Pearson's r = 0.816, 95 % CI = 0.782 - 0.845), Malawi (median Pearson's r = 0.843, 95 % CI = 0.802 - 0.876) and Bangladesh (median Pearson's r = 0.725, 95 % CI = 0.663 - 0.777). MUAC and weight changes at each outpatient visit were closely correlated (median Pearson's r = 0.954, 95 % CI = 0.602 - 0.997) under research conditions. The field data from Ethiopia and Bangladesh showed similar correlation (median Pearson's r = 0.945, 95 % CI = 0.685 - 0.998) and (median Pearson's r = 0.939, 95 % CI = 0.705 - 0.994) respectively. MUAC and weight appear to respond rapidly and similarly to episodes of illness reported during outpatient treatment for SAM for MUAC, diarrhoea RR = 1.88 (95 % CI = 1.64 - 2.15), vomiting RR = 1.89 (95 % CI = 1.58 - 2.26), fever RR = 1.57 (95 % CI = 1.36 - 1.82) and cough1.42 (95 % CI = 1.22 - 1.65). Similar relative risks are seen for weight; diarrhoea RR = 2.03 (95 % CI = 1.77 - 2.31), vomiting RR = 2.09 (95 % CI = 1.77 - 2.47), fever RR = 1.76 (95 % CI = 1.53 - 2.03) and cough RR = 1.25 (95 % CI = 1.06 - 1.48). This study demonstrates a close relationship between MUAC and weight change during recovery from SAM under both research and operational field conditions. Furthermore, changes in both MUAC and weight are observed to occur similarly and rapidly during episodes of illness occurring during treatment with no lag effect on the part of MUAC. This presents the possibility for children undergoing outpatient treatment for SAM to be monitored using MUAC as an alternative to weight. Further research would be required to develop a tool which can be deployed safely and enable MUAC to be used as the sole anthropometric measure for admission, monitoring of recovery and discharge. This development would potentially allow the further decentralisation of the treatment of SAM thus improving programme coverage and child survival.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 23 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Public Health
#774
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,977
of 396,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Public Health
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,144 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.