Skip to main content
PLOS Global Public Health logoLink to PLOS Global Public Health
. 2023 Jan 24;3(1):e0000586. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000586

Factors driving underweight, wasting, and stunting among urban school aged children: Evidence from Merawi town, Northwest Ethiopia

Tilahun Tewabe 1, Md Moustafa Kamal 2,*, Khorshed Alam 3, Ali Quazi 4, Majharul Talukder 4, Syeda Z Hossain 2
Editor: Jitendra Kumar Singh5
PMCID: PMC10021509  PMID: 36962941

Abstract

Prior research identified malnutrition as one of the most common causes of morbidity and mortality among children globally. Furthermore, research revealed that over two thirds of deaths associated with inappropriate feeding practices occurred during the early years of life. Improper feeding practices impact a child’s health in many different ways. However, research on the possible factors driving underweight, wasting, and stunting among school aged children in developing countries is limited, hence warrant further attention. Against this backdrop, this research strives to identify and assess the determinants of underweight, wasting and stunting among school aged children of a developing country-Ethiopia. A community based cross-sectional study was conducted from April 1, 2018 to June 15, 2018 in Merawi town, Ethiopia. An interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 422 children. Binary logistic regression technique was performed to examine the effect of each selected variable on the outcome measure. The prevalence of being underweight, wasting and stunting was found to be 5.7%, 9.8%, 10.4%, respectively. The age of the child [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 12.930 (2.350, 71.157)] and the number of children [AOR = 8.155 (1.312, 50.677)] were emerged as the key determinants for underweight, and the gender of the child was significantly associated with wasting [AOR = 0.455 (0.224, 0.927)]. Finally, the age of the child [AOR = 12.369 (2.522, 60.656)] was found to predict the risk of stunting. This study revealed the age, number of children and gender of the child to have a significant association with malnutrition. The findings of this research suggest that in improving the feeding practices of young school-aged children, special attention should be paid to female children and those coming from relatively large families.

Introduction

Childhood malnutrition including underweight, wasting, and stunting and their consequences are the major global health priority, particularly in low- and middle-income countries [1]. Malnutrition is the most important risk factor for childhood illnesses and deaths globally, with hundreds of millions of young children being affected worldwide [2]. More importantly, the majority of stunting, underweight, wasting and including micronutrient deficiencies in children are occurring in developed regions such as in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, mainly due to inadequate feeding to meet their growth demand and high burden of infectious diseases in the regions [3, 4].

School age children ranging between 6–12 years has been found to be a critical period of physical, cognitive, and social development of children [5, 6]. However, in case of a problem such as nutrition [7], these vital parameters would not be achieved and may result in chronic malnutrition, intellectual development delay, school failures, and delayed transition to safe adolescent and adulthood [8, 9]. Although, there is lack of comprehensive evidence about the magnitude of malnutrition among school age children, small scale surveys in developing countries indicate that a high burden of chronic malnutrition such as stunting in school age children is observed to be prevalent amongst 40% India [10], 39% in Indonesia [11], and 26% in Bangladesh [12, 13], and 22.5% in Nigeria [14].

Studies in an Ethiopian context have reported a high prevalence of malnutrition among school going children. For example, an study conducted in Addis Ababa [15] and a systematic review [16] reported up to 18% prevalence of underweight among school age children. Also, other small scale surveys reported up to a 57% stunting rate in Humbo located at Southwestern Ethiopia [17], 46% in Northwestern Ethiopia [17], and 42% in southern Ethiopia [18]. Age of child, mother education, parent occupation, family size, food insecurity and poverty were the main predictors of higher prevalence of chronic malnutrition in the regions [1719]. However, research findings pertaining to the above issues are still inconsistent and inconclusive. While overall, substantial progress has been made in child health programs including school based feeding, nutrition education, awareness creation, periodic deworming, vitamin, a supplementation and vaccinations, the rate of this reduction in the level of malnutrition like stunting has been insufficient to achieve child health-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations [20]. To achieve child health related goals, up-to-date evidence on nutritional status and related factors are needed to evaluate progresses and identify gaps for future intervention.

Using these premises, we conducted this community-based survey to assess nutritional status of school age children by collecting information on socio-demographics, economic status, child diet habits, food insecurity, and others leading to under nutrition.

Materials and methods

Study settings and period

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted between April 1, 2018 and June 15, 2018 in Merawi town, which is located in Amhara regional state in Ethiopia, 535 km away from Addis Ababa, and 30 km from Bahir Dar. Based on the latest projections from the Central Statistical Agency of Ethiopia, Merawi is estimated to have a total population of 35,541. Of these, 18,479 are males and 17,062 are females. Most of the inhabitants (98.91%) practiced Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity. The town has several private and public health clinics, including a public health center, and a public hospital.

The sample size was calculated using a single population proportion formula by considering the following assumptions: P = 50% proportion of malnutrition for school age children, margin of error (d) 5%, and confidence level (CL) 95%, and after considering a 10% non-response rate, the final sample size stood at 422. All three kebeles (small administrative units) of the town were included in the study. The number of households in the town was obtained from the administrative offices. We proportionated the sample size based on the number of households in each kebele. Households in each kebele were then selected using computer generated random numbers. From the selected household, we interviewed mothers with school age children. The youngest child was included in the sample for those with more than one child in a similar age group in the same household. However, we moved to the immediate next household for households without school-age children to conduct our interview.

Data collection tools and procedure

Data were collected by trained nurses through a structured questionnaire using back translation mechanism. The instrument was translated into Amharic from English, before being translated back and pre-tested for consistency. Data collectors were properly trained in collection techniques and procedures. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews with mothers along with their child (6–12 years of age) to assess socio-demographic variables and environmental characteristics, including maternal/child characteristics, and finally anthropometric measurements.

Data quality assurance

All research related questionnaires of this study was developed after comprehensive review of the literature and was subsequently pre-tested using 5% of the calculated sample size. Training was given in relation to each module of the questionnaire for data collectors. To ensure data quality, completeness, accuracy, and consistency, all collected data were checked every day by the investigator during the entire data collection period. Any errors related to clarity, ambiguity, incompleteness, and misunderstanding, were resolved on a daily basis.

Variables of the study

Dependent variable

The main outcome variable of the study is the nutritional status (underweight, wasting and stunting) among school age children.

Independent variable

A large number of variables were used as independent variables in this study. These include (1) social and economic variables such as low food availability, dietary diversity, media access, misconception about certain feedings, inadequate feeding practice during illness, inadequate breastfeeding and weaning practices, late initiation of complementary feeding, access to iodized salts, family planning and number of children, (2) environmental factors such as unhygienic living conditions, agricultural, and food shortage; (3) child and maternal related factors such as age, sex, birth interval, birth size, breastfeeding, educational status, place of delivery and immunizations. These independent variables are drawn from prior research in similar fields [15, 2030].

Fig 1 depicts the nexus between dependent and independent variables examined in this research. The research model (Fig 1) represents the category of variables assessed in this study. The diagram on the right-hand side represents the dependent (outcome) variable which is school age children nutritional status. This variable is measured by the level of underweight, wasting and stunting, diet habits and household food security. Weight of the child was measured using a digital weight scale (7506 digital scale) and was recorded in the nearest one decimal point, and height of the child was measured using a fixed non-bending wooden meter. Children were instructed to take off their shoes to stand upright on their heels, buttocks and shoulders touching the wall. Height of the child was measured and recorded in centimeters. After the measurements were performed, child’s nutritional status was defined as being underweight, wasting and stunting, i.e., when the child had one of the three characteristics such that weight for height, height for age, and weight for age less than -2SD from the reference population based on the WHO multicenter growth reference chart 2007 [23].

Fig 1. A research model showing the possible links between the explanatory and outcome variables.

Fig 1

On the other hand, the three boxes on the left-hand side of the model represents explanatory (independent) variables including socio-economic variables, environmental and child and maternal factors. The social and economic variables which are measured by low foods availability, dietary diversity, media access, misconceptions about certain feedings, inadequate feeding practices during illness, inadequate breastfeeding and weaning practices, late initiation of complementary feeding, access to iodized salts, family planning and number of children. The environmental factors, include sanitation, agriculture (irrigation), and food shortages in the household. Finally, the maternal and child-related factors included age, sex, birth interval, birth size, breastfeeding, educational status, maternal, place of delivery and immunization of the child.

Data analysis

Collected data were entered and cleaned using Epi data version 3.1 and exported to WHO Anthro Plus and SPSS software version 21 for analysis. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to present the data. Binary logistic regression was performed to examine the effect of each independent variable on the outcome variable, and this is presented with adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We also examined for the presence of collinearity issue among variables and the results were found to be in acceptable range; variance inflation factor (VIF) was in acceptable rage (VIF< 3). A non-significant Hosmer-Lemeshow model goodness fit test was also achieved. Statistical significance was set at the universal cut off point of p = <0.05.

Ethics approval

Ethical clearance was obtained from the Amhara Public Health Institute. The data collectors informed each parent/guardian and confirmed their willingness to participate by signing an informed consent sheet. Thus, consent was obtained from each study participant and confidentiality was assured for all the information provided. Moreover, personal identifiers were not included in the questionnaire.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics

Of all eligible participants, 392 constituted a response rate of 92.8%. Just over half (50.8%) of the respondents were males, 47% were between 6–8 years of age, and 30.3% were first in birth order. As far as the age of the mother is concerned, an overwhelming majority (96.5%) were between 18–45 years of age, 59.6% had family members of five and above, 46.5% had 3 to 4 children, and 65.2% were orthodox Christians. Concerning educational status of mothers, 55.8% were high school and above educated, 42.2% were employed, and 82.3% were married. Convresely, 64.7% of husbands were educated at hiigh school level and above. Of these 46.9% were employed, 12.6% had farming land, and 68.7% had an average monthly income of 2001 Ethiopian birr and above. A vast majority of mothers (93.7%) had access to electronic information from different sources (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic distribution of school age children in Merawi town, Northwest, Ethiopia, 2018 (n = 396).

Variable Response Total n (%) Underweight n (%) Stunted n (%) Wasted n (%)
Sex of the child Male 201 (50.8) 12 (3.8) 17(4.3) 28 (7.1)
Female 195 (49.2) 6 (1.9) 22 (5.6) 13 (3.3)
Age of the child 6–8 years 186 (47.0) 4 (1.3) 3(0.8) 25 (6.3)
9–10 years 134 (33.8) 13 (4.1) 18 (4.5) 14(3.5)
11–12 years 76 (19.2) 1(0.3) 18 (4.5) 2 (0.5)
Number of children 1–2 179 (45.2) 10 (3.1) 18 (4.5) 20 (5.1)
3–4 184 (46.5) 5 (1.6) 17 (4.3) 20 (5.1)
Five and above 33 (8.3) 3(0.9) 4(1.0) 1(0.3)
Number of family 1–2 10 (2.5) 10 (3.1) 1(0.3) 1(0.3)
3–4 150 (37.9) 5(1.6) 16 (4.0) 16(4.0)
5+ 236 (59.6) 3 (0.9) 22(5.6) 22 (5.6)
Birth order of the child First 120 (30.3) 5 (1.6) 11 (2.8) 12 (3.0)
Second and above 276 (69.7) 13 (4.1) 28 (7.1) 29 (7.3)
Age of mother 18–45 381 (96.2) 18 (5.7) 34 (8.6) 41 (10.4)
46–60 15 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 5 (1.3) 0 (0.0)
Religion Orthodox 258 (65.2) 8 (2.5) 21 (5.3) 23(5.8)
Muslim 100 (25.3) 9(2.8) 16(4.0) 13 (3.3)
Protestant 38 (9.6) 1 (0.3) 2(0.5) 5(1.3)
Mother education Educated 221 (55.8) 10(3.1) 23 (5.8) 23(5.8)
Uneducated 175 (44.2) 8 (2.5) 16 (4.0) 18 (4.5)
Occupation of mother Employed 167 (42.2) 7 (2.2) 19 (4.8) 17 (4.3)
Farmer 13 (3.3) 0 (0.0) 1(0.3) 0 (0.0)
Unemployed 216 (54.5) 11 (3.5) 19 (4.8) 24 (6.1)
Marital status Married 326 (82.3) 16 (5.0) 30 (7.6) 34 (8.6)
Unmarried 70 (17.7) 2 (0.6) 9 (2.3) 7 (1.8)
Husband level education Educated 233 (64.7) 9 (2.8) 26(6.6) 26 (6.6)
Uneducated 127 (35.3) 9 (2.8) 12 (3.1) 15 (3.8)
husband’s occupation Employed 169 (46.9) 7(2.2) 18 (4.6) 20(5.1)
Unemployed 191 (53.1) 11 (3.6) 20(4.6) 20 (5.2)
Farming land Yes 50 (12.6) 2 (0.6) 3(0.8) 2 (0.5)
No 346 (87.4) 16 (5.0) 36 (9.1) 39 (9.8)
Irrigation user Yes 30 (7.6) 1(0.3) 2(0.5) 1 (0.3)
No 366 (92.4) 17 (5.3) 37 (9.3) 40 (10.1)
Average monthly income < 1000 40 (10.1) 1 (0.3) 3 (0.8) 2 (0.5)
1001–2000 84 (21.2) 5 (1.6) 7 (1.8) 8 (2.0)
> 2001 272 (68.7) 12 (3.8) 29 (7.3) 31 (7.8)
A radio and or television Yes 370 (93.4) 17 (5.3) 39 (9.8) 39 (9.8)
No 26 (6.6) 1(0.3) 0(0.0) 2(0.5)

Maternal and child health related characteristics

Regarding child and maternal health utilization characteristics, 364 (91.9%) had ante-natal follow up, 272 (68.7%) had TT vaccinations, 325 (82.1%) received additional feeding during pregnancy, 361 (91.2%) delivered in health institutions, 393 (99.2%) had experience of breastfeeding, 314 (79.3%) practiced breastfeeding exclusively, and 333 (84.1%) mothers used family planning to control birth.

About 279 (70.5%) children were fully vaccinated, 255 (64.4%) took vitamin A supplement up to five years old, most (86.4%) children were in school with nearly half below grade two. About 55 (13.9%) children engaged in work; amongst them, 20 (36.4%) spent more than three hours per day in work. About 297 (75.0%) had a history of illness: diarrhea (54.5%), pneumonia (31.3%), measles (3%), malaria (2.7%) and others (8.4%). About 171 (43.2%) children had diarrheal morbidity in the past one year, 149 (37.6%) took additional feeding during illness, 382 (96.5%) children had breakfast regularly, and of them 336 (85.1%) had their meals four and more times per day.

A total of 360 (90.9%) mothers had access to child nutrition education, 61 (15.4%) experienced water shortage for cooking, 367 (92.7%) used pipe water, 372 (93.9%) regularly kept child hygiene, 323 (81.6%) regularly washed their hands, 352 (88.9%) cut their nails, 323 (81.6%) used iodized salt, 288 (72.7%) used wood for cooking, and 288 (72.7%) had a modern latrine facility (see Table 2 for details).

Table 2. Maternal related characteristics distribution of school age children in Merawi town, Northwest, Ethiopia, 2018 (n = 396).

Variables Response Frequency Percent
Antenatal care follows up Yes 364 91.9
No 32 8.1
TT Immunization status Completed 272 68.7
Incomplete 101 25.5
Not vaccinated 23 5.8
Additional feeding during pregnancy Yes 325 82.1
No 71 17.9
Place of delivery Health facility 361 91.2
Home 35 8.8
History of breastfeeding Yes 393 99.2
No 3 0.8
EBF Yes 314 79.3
No 82 20.7
Vaccination status Completed 279 70.5
Not completed 109 27.5
Not vaccinated 8 2.0
Vitamin A supplementation Yes 255 64.4
Not completed 128 32.3
No 13 3.3
Ever used of FP methods Yes 333 84.1
No 63 15.9
Is your child on school Yes 342 86.4
No 54 13.6
Level/ grade of education 1–2 grade 172 49.7
Grade three above 174 50.3
Is your child engaged in work Yes 55 13.9
No 341 86.1
If engaged in work for how many hours 1–3 hours 31 55.4
Above three hours 25 44.6
How can the child get feeding if he engages in work for more than 3 hours Yes 20 36.4
No 35 63.6
Child history of illness Yes 297 75.0
No 99 25.0
Type of illness Pneumonia 93 31.3
Diarrhea 162 54.5
Measles 9 3.0
Malaria 8 2.7
Others /specify 25 8.4
Child diarrheal morbidity in the past year one year Yes 171 43.2
No 225 56.8
Child diarrheal morbidity in the last two weeks Yes 27 6.8
No 369 93.2
Type feeding do you give for your child during illnesses Regular family dish 247 62.4
Additional feeding 149 37.6
Do the child eat breakfast regularly Yes 382 96.5
No 14 3.5
Frequency of eating per day Four and above 336 85.1
1–3 59 14.9
Access to child nutrition education Yes 360 90.9
No 36 9.1
Water shortage for cooking Yes 61 15.4
No 335 84.6
Type of water used for cooking Pipe 367 92.7
Dam water River /follow water 29 7.3
Boiling water for serving a child Yes 22 5.6
No 374 94.4
Do you regularly keep your child hygiene Yes 372 93.9
No /pipe 24 6.1
Regular hand washing Yes 323 81.6
No 73 18.4
Nail cutting Yes 352 88.9
Only mine 35 8.8
No 9 2.3
Type of salt used for cooking Iodized 323 81.6
Normal/dish salt 73 18.4
Type cooking fuel Wood 288 72.7
Petroleum gas 13 3.3
electricity 95 24.0
Type of toilet Modern latrine 288 72.7
Temporary toilet/ open 108 27.3

Keys: Regular breakfast: when a child always eat breakfast; Frequency of eating per day: number of meals per day; Water shortage for cooking: when there is lack of access to clean water like tap water for cooking.

Factors driving malnutrition

Initially variables were tested using bivariate analysis to see their association with the outcome variables (underweight, wasting and stunting). Gender, diarrhea in the past year, age of the child, number of children, husband’s education, year of education, and type of salt used were the independent predictors of underweight. Gender, age of the child, farming land, irrigation, diarrheal illness, breakfast, and mother education about child feeding were the independent predictors of wasting. Vaccination, Vitamin A supplement, child work engagement, age of the child, mother’s age, child’s level of education, and food served at work were the independent predictors of stunting. Age of the child and number of children were the final predictors for being underweight, while it was gender for wasting, and age of the child for stunting.

After identifying variables in the bivariate analysis, we performed multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine the significant variables that determined nutritional status of school ages in the study area. Thus, in the binary logistic regression model, the age of the child emerged as the key determinant for being underweight. A child between 6–8 years of age has an almost 13 times higher chance of having a normal weight than a child of 9–12 years of age [AOR = 12.930 (2.350, 71.157)]. On the other hand, the number of children emerged as the determinant for being underweight. Children living within families with 3–4 children were almost eight times more likely to have a normal weight than those from families with five or more children [AOR = 8.155 (1.312, 50.677)] (see Table 3). By contrast, wasting was affected by the gender of the child. A male child had a 55% lower chance to have a normal body mass index for his age than those of female children [AOR = 0.455(0.224, 0.927)] (see Table 4). This study revealed age of the child as the driving factor of height for age (stunting). Children within the age group of 6–8 years were almost 13 times more likely to be affected by stunting than those of children within the age group of 9–12 years [AOR = 12.369 (2.522, 60.656)] (Table 5).

Table 3. Factors associated with underweight school age children in Merawi town, Northwest, Ethiopia, 2018 (n = 396).

Variables Weight for age
Response Normal Under weight COR (95% CL) AOR (95% CL) P- value
Sex Male 151 12 0.507 (0.185, 1.385)
Female 149 6 1
Diarrhea last year Yes 128 5 1.935 (0.673, 5.565)
No 172 13 1
Age of the child 6–8 180 4 5.250 (1.688, 16.333) 12.930 (2.350, 71.157) 0.003
9–12 120 14 1 1
No of children 1–2 146 10 2.737 (0.682, 10.986)
3–4 138 5 5.175 (1.129, 23.710) 8.155 (1.312, 50.677) 0.024
5+ 16 3 1
Husband education Educated 193 9 1.838 (0.708, 4.772)
Uneducated 105 9 1
Grade/ level of education 1–2 153 6 2.383 (0.841,6.755)
3+ 107 10 1
Type of salt Iodized 242 17 0.245 (0.032,1.882)
Non iodized 58 1 1

Keys: COR: Crude Odds ratio; AOR: Adjusted Odds Ratio; N: Number

Table 4. Distribution of body mass index for age among urban school age children in Merawi, Northwest Ethiopia, 2018 (n = 396) (urban).

Variables Body mass index for age
Response Normal Low COR (95% CL) AOR (95% CL) P- value
Sex Male 173 28 0.441(0.221, .880) 0.455(.224, .927) 0.030
Female 182 13 1 1
Age of child 6–8 161 25 0.531(0.274, 1.029)
9–12 194 16 1
Farming land Yes 48 2 3.049 (0.713, 13.039)
No 307 39 1
Irrigation Yes 29 1 3.558(0.472, 26.832)
No 326 40 1
Diarrheal illness Yes 158 13 1.727(0.866, 3.445)
No 197 28 1
Breakfast Yes 344 38 2.469 (0.660, 9.241)
No 11 3 1
Education about child feeding Yes 320 40 0.229(0.030, 1.714)
No 35 1 1

Table 5. Distribution of Height for age among urban school age children in Merawi, Northwest Ethiopia, 2018 (n = 396).

Variables Height for age
Responses Normal Stunted COR (95% CL) AOR (95% CL) P- value
Vaccination Yes 258 21 2.234(1.142, 4.369)
No 99 18 1
Vitamin A vaccination Yes 238 17 2.588(1.324, 5.058)
No 119 22 1
Child work engagement Yes 45 10 0.418(0.191, 0.916)
No 312 29 1
Age of the child 6–8 183 3 12.621(3.817,41.732) 12.369 (2.522, 60.656) 0.002
9–12 174 36 1
Mother age 20–45 347 34 5.103(1.649,15.794)
46+ 10 5 1
Child level of education 1–2 165 7 4.141(1.746, 9.821)
3+ 148 26 1
Food serving on work Normal 226 21 1.479(.760,2.876)
Additional 131 18 1

Discussion

Prevalence of being underweight stood at 5.7% in this research. This result is much lower than that of the prior studies conducted: 16% in Adds Ababa [15], 28% in rural Northwest Ethiopia [31], and from neighboring country Kenya (14.9%) [28]. This could be attributed to the fact that in the study area, child eating habits were extended to almost three times per day, while fasting occurred at the early age group, and there was an absence of school-based feeding.

This research revealed the age of the child to be the determinant factor for being underweight. A child between 6–8 years of age is almost 13 times more likely to have a normal weight for their age than that of a 9–12-year-old child. On the other hand, the number of children in a family was the determinant for being underweight. Children living with 3–4 children in a family were almost eight times more likely to have normal weight than those from families with five or more children. This finding is consistent with the research findings in Addis Ababa [15], a systematic review in Ethiopia [16] and in Nairobi [28], and may be attributed to the fact that when the child is at a young school age there is a risk of poor appetite in relation to the school environment, and when the number of children is increased it may create acute food shortages in poor families resulting in negligent child-rearing habits.

The prevalence of wasting was 9.8%, which was similar with 9% in Gonder [17] but lower than the that of the findings and other studies in Uganda [32], in Afghanistan [33] and in Kenya [28]. This may be due to accelerated growth in this age group, which may be related to good feeding, in terms of access to food and diversity of food. By contrast, wasting was affected by the sex of the child. A male child had a 55% lower chance of having a normal body mass index for his age, which is comparable to the findings in Maputo, Mozambique [34], in Western Kenya [35], Nairobi [28], and India [25]. This finding points to a subconscious practice to pay preferential attention to male children and this practice is prevalent in many underdeveloped countries in Asia and Africa. In this study the prevalence of stunting was found to be at 10.4% which is lower than those study findings in 16% in Adds Ababa [15], 42% Southern Ethiopia [18], 46% in Gonder [17], and from Uganda of 23.8% [32], in Kenya of 30.2% [28], and in Abeokuta, Southwest Nigeria of 17.4% [36]. This could be due to the socio-cultural and economic differences between countries from the referenced areas. In this study, the age of the child emerged as the determinant factor of height for age or stunting. Children within the age group of 6–8 years were almost 13 times more likely to be affected by stunting than those within the age group of 9–12 years. This finding corroborates the research finding in relation to Afghanistan [33, 37], India [25], in Gonder [33] and in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia [15]. This may be due to very young school age children being at risk of adopting school-based feeding, the distance of the school from the home, and a change of the environment at school from home.

The findings of the study make significant contributions to knowledge in relation to the critical roles played by age, number of children in a family, and the gender of the child in driving nutritional status among children in a developing country such as Ethiopia. In particular, this research has contributed to the realm of our knowledge gap in terms of feeding practices of young school-aged children especially female children often receiving comparatively less attention as well as children belonging to large families.

Study limitations and potential for further study

Despite its unique contributions, this study has a number of limitations. First, this is a community-based study using information provided by mothers about their children to assess the nutritional status of their school age children, which might have information recall bias to some variables related to time. Second, estimates of a child’s nutrition were measured using the internationally used standard tools and definitions, which did not consider country specific parameters. This might underestimate or overestimate the local situation. Third, this research only used a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire and measurements that might not reflect culture and perception of food taboos in the community. Fourth, this research was confined to a particular region of Ethiopia with a relatively small sample size which might affect the generalizability of the findings across the borders in the country and beyond. However, future research could use the result to conduct more broad-based sample drawn from several regions in Ethiopia and beyond to come up with better findings for practice and research about child nutrition in developing regions.

Concluding remarks

This research addressed some critical issues in the public health arena that were not well covered in the existing literature, especially in the context of a developing African country, Ethiopia where malnutrition is highly prevalent in school aged children. In particular, this study identified the possible determinants of underweight, wasting and stunting among school aged children (6–12 years). The outcomes of this study have an important bearing on designing appropriate policies to address the current problems pertaining to the above issues examined in this research. One particular issue emerging from this research that warrants the attention of policymakers is that female children receive lesser attention than their male counterparts in terms of feeding. Furthermore, attention can be directed to children belonging to large families as they are more likely to suffer from malnutrition and are underweight for an obvious reason. Age of children is another issue deserving attention because malnutrition leading to underweight is more common in older students than their younger counterparts. Although the data of this study was obtained from mothers and might involve recall bias to some variable which suggests the importance of prospective and rigorous to investigate causal associations, this study shows that school age children feeding practices need to be improved and adjusted to the children cohorts identified in this research. Finally, since, healthy work force is vital for accelerating the pace of economic growth of a transitional economy such as Ethiopia, policymakers should address the above-mentioned issues as an early intervention strategy towards developing healthy human resources for Ethiopia to reap the benefits of demographic dividend.

Data Availability

The data of this study cannot be shared publicly due to the presence of sensitive (confidential) participants’ information. This is approved by the Amhara Public Health Institute Research Ethics Committee (address: Felege Hiwot Rd, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia; post code: 641). Besides, the data collection have been funded by the Mecha Field and Demographic Health Survey Centre, Bahir Dar Ethiopia (Tis Abay RD, BDU; post code 079). Therefore, accessibility of the data is subject to permission of the above organizations.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.de Onis M, Branca F. Childhood stunting: a global perspective. Matern Child Nutr. 2016. May;12 Suppl 1:12–26. doi: 10.1111/mcn.12231 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Children: improving survival and well-being [Internet]. [cited 2021 Jan 29]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/children-reducing-mortality
  • 3.Cusick SE, Kuch AE. Determinants of Undernutrition and Overnutrition among Adolescents in Developing Countries. Adolesc Med State Art Rev. 2012. Dec;23(3):440–56. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.WHO | Global strategy for infant and young child feeding [Internet]. WHO. World Health Organization; [cited 2021 Jan 29]. http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/9241562218/en/
  • 5.Fink G, Rockers PC. Childhood growth, schooling, and cognitive development: further evidence from the Young Lives study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014. Jul;100(1):182–8. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.080960 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Onis M. Child Growth and Development. In 2017. p. 119–41.
  • 7.Bryan J, Osendarp S, Hughes D, Calvaresi E, Baghurst K, van Klinken JW. Nutrients for cognitive development in school-aged children. Nutr Rev. 2004. Aug;62(8):295–306. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2004.tb00055.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Asmare B, Taddele M, Berihun S, Wagnew F. Nutritional status and correlation with academic performance among primary school children, northwest Ethiopia. BMC Research Notes. 2018. Nov 9;11(1):805. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3909-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Acharya Y, Luke N, Haro MF, Rose W, Russell PSS, Oommen AM, et al. Nutritional status, cognitive achievement, and educational attainment of children aged 8–11 in rural South India. PLOS ONE. 2019. Oct 9;14(10):e0223001. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Pal D, Kanungo S. Malnutrition Scenario among School Children in Eastern-India-an Epidemiological Study. Epidemiology [Internet]. 2016. [cited 2022 Sep 22];06(02). Available from: https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/malnutrition-scenario-among-school-children-in-easternindiaan-epidemiological-study-2161-1165-1000228.php?aid=69443 [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lestari S, Fujiati II, Keumalasari D, Daulay M. The prevalence and risk factors of stunting among primary school children in North Sumatera, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2018. Mar;125(1):012219. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Sanin KI, Haque A, Nahar B, Mahfuz M, Khanam M, Ahmed T. Food Safety Practices and Stunting among School-Age Children—An Observational Study Finding from an Urban Slum of Bangladesh. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022. Jun 30;19(13):8044. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19138044 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Danjin M, Adewoye S, Sawyerr H. Prevalence and Socio-demographic Determinants of Stunting among School Age Children (SAC) in Gombe State, Nigeria. Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research. 2020. Mar 12;22–34. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bogale TY, Bala ET, Tadesse M, Asamoah BO. Prevalence and associated factors for stunting among 6–12 years old school age children from rural community of Humbo district, Southern Ethiopia. BMC Public Health. 2018. May 24;18(1):653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Degarege D, Degarege A, Animut A. Undernutrition and associated risk factors among school age children in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. BMC Public Health. 2015. Apr 12;15(1):375. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1714-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Assemie MA, Alamneh AA, Ketema DB, Adem AM, Desta M, Petrucka P, et al. High burden of undernutrition among primary school-aged children and its determinant factors in Ethiopia; a systematic review and meta-analysis. Italian Journal of Pediatrics. 2020. Sep 4;46(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s13052-020-00881-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Getaneh Z, Melku M, Geta M, Melak T, Hunegnaw MT. Prevalence and determinants of stunting and wasting among public primary school children in Gondar town, northwest, Ethiopia. BMC Pediatrics. 2019. Jun 25;19(1):207. doi: 10.1186/s12887-019-1572-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tariku EZ, Abebe GA, Melketsedik ZA, Gutema BT. Prevalence and factors associated with stunting and thinness among school-age children in Arba Minch Health and Demographic Surveillance Site, Southern Ethiopia. PLoS One. 2018;13(11):e0206659. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206659 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lisanu Mazengia A, Andargie Biks G. Predictors of Stunting among School-Age Children in Northwestern Ethiopia. Journal of Nutrition and Metabolism. 2018. Sep 20;2018:1–7. doi: 10.1155/2018/7521751 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.WHO | Sustainable Development Goal 3: Health [Internet]. WHO. World Health Organization; [cited 2021 Jan 27]. http://www.who.int/topics/sustainable-development-goals/targets/en/
  • 21.WHO | Indicators for assessing infant and young child feeding practices [Internet]. WHO. World Health Organization; [cited 2021 Jan 29]. https://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/documents/9789241596664/en/
  • 22.Müller O, Krawinkel M. Malnutrition and health in developing countries. CMAJ. 2005. Aug 2;173(3):279–86. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.050342 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Turck D, Michaelsen KF, Shamir R, Braegger C, Campoy C, Colomb V, et al. World Health Organization 2006 Child Growth Standards and 2007 Growth Reference Charts: A Discussion Paper by the Committee on Nutrition of the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology & Nutrition. 2013. Aug;57(2):258–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wang Y, Monteiro C, Popkin BM. Trends of obesity and underweight in older children and adolescents in the United States, Brazil, China, and Russia. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002. Jun;75(6):971–7. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/75.6.971 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Srivastava A, Mahmood SE, Srivastava PM, Shrotriya VP, Kumar B. Nutritional status of school-age children—A scenario of urban slums in India. Arch Public Health. 2012. Apr 17;70(1):8. doi: 10.1186/0778-7367-70-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Rayhan MI, Khan MSH. Factors causing malnutrition among under five children in Bangladesh. Pak J Nutr. 2006;5(6):558–62. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Kassahun Alemu KM. Prevalence of Malnutrition and Associated Factors Among Children Aged 6–59 Months at Hidabu Abote District, North Shewa, Oromia Regional State. J Nutr Disorder Ther [Internet]. 2013. [cited 2021 Jan 29];03(03). Available from: https://www.omicsonline.org/prevalence-of-malnutrition-and-associated-factors-among-children-aged-months-at-hidabu-abote-district-north-shewa-oromia-regional-state-2161-0509-3-T1-001.php?aid=16270 [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chesire EJ, Orago ASS, Oteba LP, Echoka E. Determinants of under nutrition among school age children in a Nairobi peri-urban slum. East Afr Med J. 2008. Oct;85(10):471–9. doi: 10.4314/eamj.v85i10.9671 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Shubair ME, Yassin MM, Al-Hindi AI, Al-Wahaidi AA, Jadallah SY. Intestinal parasites in relation to haemoglobin level and nutritional status of school children in Gaza. Journal of the Egyptian Society of parasitology. 2000;30(2):365–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Medhi GK, Barua A, Mahanta J. Growth and Nutritional Status of School Age Children (6–14 Years) of Tea Garden Worker of Assam. Journal of Human Ecology. 2006. Feb 1;19(2):83–5. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Degarege A, Erko B. Association between intestinal helminth infections and underweight among school children in Tikur Wuha Elementary School, Northwestern Ethiopia. J Infect Public Health. 2013. Apr;6(2):125–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jiph.2012.11.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Kikafunda JK, Walker AF, Collett D, Tumwine JK. Risk factors for early childhood malnutrition in Uganda. Pediatrics. 1998. Oct;102(4):E45. doi: 10.1542/peds.102.4.e45 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Frozanfar MK, Yoshida Y, Yamamoto E, Reyer JA, Dalil S, Rahimzad AD, et al. Acute malnutrition among under-five children in Faryab, Afghanistan: prevalence and causes. Nagoya J Med Sci. 2016. Feb;78(1):41–53. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Prista A, Maia JAR, Damasceno A, Beunen G. Anthropometric indicators of nutritional status: implications for fitness, activity, and health in school-age children and adolescents from Maputo, Mozambique. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003. Apr;77(4):952–9. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/77.4.952 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Bloss E, Wainaina F, Bailey RC. Prevalence and predictors of underweight, stunting, and wasting among children aged 5 and under in western Kenya. J Trop Pediatr. 2004. Oct;50(5):260–70. doi: 10.1093/tropej/50.5.260 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Senbanjo IO, Oshikoya KA, Odusanya OO, Njokanma OF. Prevalence of and Risk factors for Stunting among School Children and Adolescents in Abeokuta, Southwest Nigeria. J Health Popul Nutr. 2011. Aug;29(4):364–70. doi: 10.3329/jhpn.v29i4.8452 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Burki T. Ethiopia shows it is single-minded in tackling disease. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2016. Feb 1;16(2):153–4. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)00021-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000586.r001

Decision Letter 0

Dickson Abanimi Amugsi

13 Apr 2022

PGPH-D-22-00367

Factors driving underweight, wasting and stunting among urban school aged children: Evidence from Ethiopia

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Kamal,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PGPH for publication. It has now been reviewed by two independent reviewers. Although they felt that it has some merit, they have raised major issues, which you must address before your paper can be considered for publication. The issues centre around lack of clarity in your presentation, as well as inconsistencies in many areas. There is also the need for you to revisit your statistical analysis to ensure that it is rigorous enough.  

One of the reviewers suggested that it is inappropriate to use child's age as a predictor of stunting and underweight, because these indicators were computed, taking into account the child's age. This is inaccurate. Age is a key covariate of childhood underweight and stunting. Therefore, you do not need to remove the child's age from the regression models. However, you need to explain why you think age is an important covariate/predictor in your rebuttal letter. 

Please ensure that your decision is justified on PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria and not, for example, on novelty or perceived impact.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by 11/05/2022. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dickson Abanimi Amugsi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

1. Your co-authors, Tilahun Tewabe (tilahun.alamnia@anu.edu.au), Ali Quazi (Ali.Quazi@canberra.edu.au), Majharul Talukder (Majharul.Talukder@canberra.edu.au), and Syeda Z Hossain (zakia.hossain@sydney.edu.au), have not confirmed authorship of the manuscript. We have resent them the authorship confirmation email; however please check that the above email address for them is correct and follow up personally to ensure they confirm. Please note that we cannot pass your manuscript to Production until we have received confirmations from all co-authors.

Just in case your co-authors are having difficulty confirming their authorship, you may advise them to send us an email at globalpubhealth@plos.org and we will confirm their authorship on the authors' behalf.

2. Please amend your Financial Disclosure statement. If you did not receive any funding for this study, please simply state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

3. Please update your Competing Interests statement. If you have no competing interests to declare, please state: “The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.”

4. Please provide a complete Data Availability Statement in the submission form, ensuring you include all necessary access information or a reason for why you are unable to make your data freely accessible. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized. 

If your research concerns only data provided within your submission, please write “All data are in the manuscript and/or supporting information files"" as your Data Availability Statement.”

5. Please provide separate figure files in .tif or .eps format only and remove any figures embedded in your manuscript file. Please ensure that all files are under our size limit of 20MB.

For more information about how to convert your figure files please see our guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PGPH for publication. It has now been reviewed by two independent reviewers. Although they felt that it has some merit, they have raised major issues, which you must address before your paper can be considered for publication. The issues centre around lack of clarity in your presentation, as well as inconsistencies in many areas. There is also the need for you to revisit your statistical analysis to ensure that it is rigorous enough.

One of the reviewers suggested that it is inappropriate to use child's age as a predictor of stunting and underweight, because these indicators were computed, taking into account the child's age. This is inaccurate. Age is a key covariate of childhood underweight and stunting. Therefore, you do not need to remove the child's age from the regression models. However, you need to explain why you think age is an important covariate/predictor in your rebuttal letter.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Thank you very much for partaking in this essential work. This cross-sectional study probed factors driving underweight, wasting, and stunting among urban school-aged children: Evidence from Ethiopia. The issue is still requiring attention and the findings are remarkable. However, I have a few concerns that could be clarified and amended for better understanding.

Comments and questions:

• On the abstract part:

� Background - line 7 and result- line 3, the word “determinants”, is better replaced by another suitable action verb, since you have conducted a cross-sectional study. Similarly, on the same line, the phrase “…identify and assess…” should be rearranged.

� The method of sampling should be specified as well.

• On the background part:

� The first paragraph reference number 1 and 4 talk about under-five children instead of your focus area which is school-age children.

� In the second paragraph, there is a mix of ideas i.e. initially you stated global magnitude of malnutrition (first line), then about SAM (second line), consequently about risk factors (from line 3 to 5), finally global magnitude of malnutrition again (from line 6 to 8). Therefore, it is better to develop paragraphs with one topic sentence and other supporting sentences separately.

� The 3rd paragraph – reference number 8 does not match on the list of references (EDHS 2011 instead of EDHS 2016). And these children are under-five as well.

� The 3rd paragraph – lines number 4 and 5 (… 700,000 pregnant and breastfeeding women …) is out of the scope of this study.

� The 3rd paragraph – line number 6 (… the rate of this reduction in under-five …) better to focus on school-aged children.

• Methods and materials

� Variables of the study

� You said your dependent variable is the nutritional status (underweight, wasting, and stunting) among under-five children. Why?

� On independent variables line number 6 (environmental factors such as nhygienic …) requires edition. Additionally, what do you mean by “birth size” on line number 7? And what is its relevance, since it is not included in your result part?

� On page 6 the 1st paragraph line number 4 – you stated that “the variable (nutritional status) is measured by the level of underweight, wasting and stunting, diet habits and household food security.” How did you measure and operationalize household food security)? And it is not included in your result part. Thus, it is better to remove diet habits and household food security.

� On page 6 the 2nd paragraph, it is already described on page 5 under independent variables. Therefore, what is the value of repeating it?

� Data analysis, result, and discussion

� First paragraph lines number 3 and 4 – do you mean AORs are used for presenting multivariable logistic regression analysis output?

� Socio-demographic characteristics

� On page 7, 392 response rate is not consistent with the one indicated throughout the tables (396).

� Factors driving malnutrition

� Before identifying factors driving malnutrition, you have to put the nutritional status of school-age children in terms of underweight, stunting, and wasting.

� Paragraph one line one – you said that “… bivariate analysis…” , do you mean bivariable logistic regression analyses?

� The dependent variable underweight (weight for age) is the composite measure of malnutrition. But, the age of children is considered a predictor of being underweight, which is inappropriate. Therefore, the analysis has to be done again.

� Similarly, since stunting is measured using height for age, using age as an independent variable is inappropriate. Therefore, the analysis has to be done again.

� Table 3, 4, and 5 – all of the confidence intervals constructed are wide. This is related to using small sample size, hence to come up with better analysis output, categories with very small values shall be revised and merged.

• Discussion

� Paragraph one, lines 4, 5, and 6 – “This could be attributed to the fact that in the study area, child eating habits were extended to almost three times per day, …”. Have you come across other areas children’s feeding habits to say this? “ … while fasting occurred in the early age group, and there was an absence of school-based feeding.” Do you think these ideas support your argument for having lower underweight compared with the aforementioned areas?

� Third paragraph, line 2 – What about the timing of the research they conducted? For example, reference numbers 16 (2008) and 19(1998). It is better to use recent references for a reasonable comparison. This comment is also applied to the prevalence of stunting since similar references are used (Paragraph three, line 10).

• Concluding remarks

� Line one – “… arena …”, do you mean area?

Nevertheless, the above comments and questions are provided, the paper’s publishability depends on the authors’ reactions to revise their manuscript commented and response for review questions accordingly.

Reviewer #2: Feedback to authors

The grammatical and sentence structure needs modification as general comments.

1. Abstract section

� Results: ………….. key determinants of underweight, and the gender of the child was significantly associated with wasting [AOR= 0.455 (0.224, 0.927)]. The word determinants are better replaced by associated factors since your study design was cross-sectional.

� Conclusion: make clear the possible early interventions that you intend

2. Background

� Take updated data about the prevalence of nutritional status with updated references worldwide

� Take the Ethiopian mini-EDHS 2019 data

� Explain the interventions regarding the Ethiopian context of school health and nutrition initiatives

3. Methods and materials

� During your data quality assurance of questionnaire, you mentioned that as you pre-tested in 5% of the calculated sample size what was your chrome batch alpha?

� During your data analysis specify your cut of the p-value for eligibility to be screened for the multivariate logistic regression model

� Ethical approval and consent to participate letter date and number given by should be mentioned

4. Result

� Maternal and child health-related characteristics variables in Table 2 need operational definitions of how they were measured:

� A total of 360 (90.9%) mothers had access to child nutrition education,

� (255 (64.4 %) took vitamin A supplement up)

� 55 (13.9%) children engaged in work,

� 61 (15.4%) experienced water shortage for cooking,

� 367 (92.7%) used pipe water,

� 372 (93.9%) regularly kept child hygiene

� 323 (81.6%) regularly washed their hands,

� 352 (88.9%) cut their nails,

� 323 (81.6%) used iodized salt,

� 288 (72.7%) had a modern latrine facility

NB :

� Accessibility of child nutrition education how it was measured?

� vitamin A supplementation: from the standard of supplementation how many times has the child has supplemented from his/her age

� modern latrine facility: what were the criteria used to determine a latrine to be said modern? The same is true for the above-mentioned factors

5. Discussion

� Give evidence-based expiation for gender and size variables

6. Conclusion

� Indicate specifically the possible interventions for concerned body based on your findings.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Yirdaw Melese Yilma

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000586.r003

Decision Letter 1

Dickson Abanimi Amugsi

27 Jul 2022

PGPH-D-22-00367R1

Factors driving underweight, wasting and stunting among urban school aged children: Evidence from Ethiopia

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Mr. Kamal,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

Thank you for choosing PGPH. Two additional independent reviewers have assessed your paper and found it to have merit, but there are substantial weaknesses associated with the manuscript that need to be addressed to make it publishable. While Reviewer 4 raised substantial issues regarding the data analysis, Reviewer 3 raised major issues in every aspect of the manuscript.

Although, the earlier two independent reviewers recommended that the manuscript should be accepted for publication, I identified major issues after assessing it. Hence, my decision not to accept their recommendation. Indeed, the current reviewers have highlighted most of the concerns I had with your manuscript. I suggest you adequately address their comments and ensure the quality of the paper is improved...you may seek support from senior colleagues where necessary.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by 25/08/2022. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Dickson Abanimi Amugsi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

1. Please include a separate legend for Figure 1 in your manuscript.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

Reviewer #4: (No Response)

**********

2. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: No

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear researchers, thank you very much for addressing and responding to the comments and questions forwarded.

Reviewer #2: Good all my comments have been addressed.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

Reviewer #4: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000586.r005

Decision Letter 2

Jitendra Kumar Singh

12 Dec 2022

PGPH-D-22-00367R2

Factors driving underweight, wasting, and stunting among urban school aged children: Evidence from Merawi town, Northwest Ethiopia.

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. KAMAL,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by 20 December 2022. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jitendra Kumar Singh, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

This is overall interesting paper that covers an area of great interest. The authors have made a very good effort overall to describe their findings, considering this is a topic highly quantitative. There are however some areas they further need to address.

Reliability and validity are incomplete. The authors should elaborate on that section.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #4: (No Response)

**********

2. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #4: No

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #4: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #4: The revision done by the authors helped improve the quality of the manuscript. However, the authors failed to provide a scientific reason for not adjusting for the 3 kebeles in their analysis, an issue I raised earlier. Their response that “However, the city has only three kebeles (small administrative units) only used for administrative purposes and the population among the kebeles are homogeneous, there is no difference among them” cannot be supported with the available data in the manuscript, and this must be proven scientifically and presented in the manuscript. Per their response, the authors are saying that the nutritional outcomes of children from the 3 different Kebeles is the same BUT they failed to provide results to support this claim in the manuscript. They should include the kebele as a predictor/covariate in their model.

In the Abstract and Discussion sections, the authors stated that “prevalence of being underweight, wasting and stunting was found to be 5.7%, 9.8%, 10.4%, respectively”. However, in the ‘Author summary’ section, the authors again stated that “The magnitude of underweight, wasting, stunting was 5.8 %, 10.8%, and 11.6%, respectively” which are completely different. How were the magnitude and the prevalence estimated for which reason the authors were reporting different values? This should be clarified or corrected.

Also, there are still some typo errors that the authors should correct. For example, ‘under weighs’ in line 235 at page 9. Also, there should be dot (.) before ‘Gender’ in line 235 at page 9. Similar typo error in line 206 at page 11 for ‘motheris’.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #4: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000586.r007

Decision Letter 3

Jitendra Kumar Singh

21 Dec 2022

Factors driving underweight, wasting, and stunting among urban school aged children: Evidence from Merawi town, Northwest Ethiopia.

PGPH-D-22-00367R3

Dear Mr. Kamal,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Factors driving underweight, wasting, and stunting among urban school aged children: Evidence from Merawi town, Northwest Ethiopia.' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Global Public Health.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact globalpubhealth@plos.org.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Global Public Health.

Best regards,

Jitendra Kumar Singh, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

***********************************************************

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Responses to reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Responses to reviewers .docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The data of this study cannot be shared publicly due to the presence of sensitive (confidential) participants’ information. This is approved by the Amhara Public Health Institute Research Ethics Committee (address: Felege Hiwot Rd, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia; post code: 641). Besides, the data collection have been funded by the Mecha Field and Demographic Health Survey Centre, Bahir Dar Ethiopia (Tis Abay RD, BDU; post code 079). Therefore, accessibility of the data is subject to permission of the above organizations.


    Articles from PLOS Global Public Health are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES