Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Aug 26;19(8):e0309122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309122

Severe acute malnutrition among children under the age of 5 years

Gift C Chama 1, Lukundo Siame 1, Chanda Kapoma 1, Benson M Hamooya 1, Sepiso K Masenga 1,*
Editor: James Mockridge2
PMCID: PMC11346641  PMID: 39186515

Abstract

Background

Severe acute malnutrition (SAM) poses a significant threat to child health globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Zambia, like many Sub-Saharan African nations, faces high rates of child malnutrition, with SAM contributing significantly to under-five mortality. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the prevalence and factors associated with SAM.

Methods

This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at Livingstone University Teaching Hospital in Zambia (LUTH). SAM was defined according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria as either weight-for-height less than -3 standard deviations, mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) less than 115 mm, or presence of bilateral pitting edema in children between 6 months and 5 years old who were attended to between 2020 and 2022. Data abstraction from pediatric patient records was conducted between August 2023 and January 2024. The records without the age and outcome variable were excluded. A total of 429 participants between 6 months and 5 years old were included, with demographic, clinical, and hematological parameters analyzed. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were employed to investigate factors associated with SAM.

Results

Overall, 429 medical records were included in the study and the prevalence of SAM was 27.0% (n = 116). Age group 6–24 months (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]: 11.60; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.34–40.89, p<0.001), living with HIV (AOR:3.90; 95% CI: 1.14–13.70, p = 0.034), Tuberculosis (TB) (AOR:22.30, 95% CI: 4.53, 110.3, p < 0.001), comorbidities (AOR: 2.50; 95% CI 1.13, 5.88, p = 0.024) and platelet count (AOR: 1.00; 95% CI 1.00, 1.00, p = 0.027) were positively associated with SAM.

Conclusions

This study found a high prevalence of SAM, exceeding the WHO target of reducing SAM to 5% by 2025. SAM was associated with younger age (6–24 months), HIV infection, TB, comorbidities and platelet count. Therefore, there is need to enhance strategies aimed at reducing SAM among young children, children living with HIV, TB and comorbidities, particularly by intensive treatment, continuing and strengthening nutrition services.

Background

Severe acute malnutrition (SAM) remains a critical global and national public health concern, particularly among children under the age of 5 years old [1]. Characterized by a significant deficit in weight-for-height ratio, bilateral pitting edema, or a mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) below a certain threshold, SAM poses substantial risks to child health and development [2]. Globally, malnutrition affects millions of children, hindering their growth, cognitive development, and overall well-being [3, 4].

In low- and middle-income countries an estimated 34.2 million cases in 2022 of children under the age of five (5) suffered from SAM, and accounted for about 45% of fatalities in children under five years [5, 6]. Sub-Saharan Africa stands at the forefront of the malnutrition crisis, with a prevalence rate of SAM far exceeding global averages, especially among women and children [7]. Factors such as food insecurity, poverty, inadequate access to healthcare, and recurring environmental shocks exacerbate the vulnerability of children in this region [8]. Limited resources and infrastructure further impede effective interventions, perpetuating cycles of malnutrition and poverty across generations [9].

Zambia has high rates of child malnutrition and mortality in southern Africa with a prevalence estimated to be about 4.2% to 5% with SAM being a major contributor to under-five mortality, especially in rural parts of the country where it often goes undetected [10, 11]. Factors which lead to malnutrition are vast and include comorbidities such as HIV and tuberculosis (TB) infection, lack of food security, maternal nutritional practices, and lack of diet diversity [12]. In order to suggest strategies on how to fight malnutrition, there is a need to understand the factors associated with malnutrition [10]. Thus, this study aimed to determine the prevalence and factors associated with SAM among children under 5 years at Livingstone University Teaching Hospital (LUTH) pediatric department.

Methods

Study design and setting

This study was a retrospective cross-sectional study conducted at the pediatric department of LUTH. The department includes a malnutrition ward, a general ward, a High Dependency Unit (HDU), and a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). LUTH serves as a referral center for southern and western provinces of Zambia, admitting around 1000 to 1500 children annually to the malnutrition and general ward.

Eligibility and sampling method

Hospital records were abstracted from children between 6 months and less than 59 months. All children came through the outpatient department and once they were found to be malnourished or were in a serious state as determined by the attending doctor, they were hospitalized. By default, those with SAM were immediately hospitalized. The majority of children included in this study were therefore hospitalized. Variables of interest, including background demographic and clinical data were abstracted from patient’s records. Any record with missing data on age and outcome was excluded from the study. The records were chosen using a systematic sampling method where every second file from the patient’s records in the department was selected for screening and eligibility. The chosen records were subsequently inputted into the research electronic data capture (REDCap).

Sample size

We used openepi.com software to calculate the sample size. The minimal estimated sample size required was 414. We used an estimated prevalence of 5% of severe malnutrition in Zambia [13]. The confidence limits of 2.1% and design effect of 1. Total number of participants included were 429.

Variables

SAM was defined according to WHO guidelines as the presence of either weight-for-height less than -3 standard deviations, mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) less than 115 mm, or bilateral pitting edema in children between 6 months and 5 years old. This definition was used by attending clinicians for diagnosing SAM and admitting and treating children with the condition [14]. Moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) in children aged 6–59 months was diagnosed by either a weight-for-height between -3 and -2 Z-scores of the WHO Child Growth Standards median, or a mid-upper-arm circumference (MUAC) measurement between 115 mm and 125 mm by the attending clinician.

SAM was the dependent variable in this study. Various independent variables included socio-demographic factors (such as age, gender, and place of residence), medical conditions including HIV status and bacteriologically confirmed TB by smear microscopy, culture, GeneXpert, or lipoarabinomanannan assay, or clinical diagnosis (which included medical history, TB contact, physical examination, chest x-ray and a positive tuberculin skin test) when bacteriological criteria were not met [15], and comorbidities such as sickle cell disease (inherited disease characterized by the presence of hemoglobin S diagnosed by either solubility testing, peripheral smear, or hemoglobin(HB) electrophoresis [16]), acute watery diarrhea (defined as more than three loose or watery stools per day lasting less than 2 weeks [17]), anemia (defined as a hemoglobin level less than 11 g/dl [18]), pneumonia (diagnosis included presence of a cough or difficulty in breathing, plus at least one of the following: central cyanosis or oxygen saturation < 90% on pulse oximetry, severe respiratory distress, or signs of pneumonia with a general danger sign and evident chest radiographic findings such as presence of consolidation, infiltrates or effusion [19]), cerebral palsy, acute pharyngotonsillitis, acute kidney injury, congenital heart disease, asthma, diabetes mellitus and lymphoma. HIV and TB are the most common comorbidities in literature, so we excluded them from the list of common comorbidities and listed them separately. Additionally, the study examined parameters from a complete blood count analysis, comprising platelet count, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, monocyte count, hemoglobin level, and white blood cell count.

Anthropometric measurement is crucial for monitoring a child’s growth and involves assessing weight, length, height and body mass index [20]. To measure weight, a digital scale or analogy is used with the child undressed or minimally clothed on a calibrated scale [20]. Length (up to 2 years old) in infants and toddlers is measured with an infantometer, while height in older children (2 years and above) is measured using a stadiometer with a vertical bar [20]. BMI is calculated from weight and height. Measurements are plotted on age- and gender-specific growth charts to track growth patterns and identify any potential health concerns, using age-appropriate techniques to ensure the child’s comfort during the process [20].

Data collection

Data from patients’ most recent hospital visit were collected between August 14, 2023 and January 8, 2024. Trained research assistants abstracted data from the medical records. The completeness of information was then audited for accuracy by senior data abstractors.

Data analysis

Data for analysis were exported from the REDCap application to Microsoft Excel 2013 for data cleaning and then coded. Data analysis was performed using Stata version 15. Descriptive analysis was used to summarize categorical variables using frequencies and percentages. Continuous variables were summarized using median (interquartile range). Shapiro-wilk test was used to assess for data normality. Association of two categorical variables were determined using a chi-square and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to determine the differences between two medians. Univariable and Multivariable logistic regression were used to investigate factors associated with SAM.

Ethics

Mulungushi University School of Medicine and Health Sciences (SOHMS) Research Ethics Committee approved the study on 06th June 2023 (ethics reference number SMHS-MU2-2023-64) and LUTH administration gave permission to access patient’s records. All data collected and analyzed were de-identified to ensure complete confidentiality. No information leading to identification of patients during and after analysis was abstracted and entered in the data collection form. Secondary data were used in this project thus, written/verbal consent was not applicable and was therefore waived by the ethics committee.

To strengthen the reporting for this observational study, we used the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) for reporting (S1 Checklist).

Results

Basic characteristic of the study participants

Out of an estimated 3000 files of children who were less than 15 years old that were attended to in the department between 2020 and 2021, we selected every second file and remained with 1500 files to screen for eligibility. The total number of files eligible and included in the analysis were 429, Fig 1.

Fig 1. Flowchart of screened and eligible files.

Fig 1

Among the children 75.6% (n = 322) of the participants were aged between 6 to 24 months, Table 1. Of the participants, 55.9.8% (n = 240) were male, and the majority hailed from urban areas (n = 271, 63.2%). Among the 414 participants with a known HIV status, the prevalence of HIV was approximately 10.1% (n = 42). Forty-four (10.3%) participants were diagnosed with TB and the majority presented with pulmonary TB (n = 24, 54.5). Among the participants, the most common comorbidities observed were sickle cell disease (n = 13, 25%), followed by acute watery diarrhea (n = 12, 23.5.1%), anemia (n = 10, 19.6%), pneumonia (n = 9, 9.5%) and acute pharyngotonsillitis (n = 8, 8.4% %). Among the participants, 180 (26.3%) had malnutrition. Out of the cases, 116 (64.4%) participants were diagnosed with SAM, while 64 cases (35.6%) exhibited MAM. Majority (56%) of the children had weight for height Z score between greater or equal to or less than two to less than plus two. Hematological parameters revealed a median platelet count of 351 (IQR: 235, 450), neutrophil count of 5.0 (IQR: 3.0, 8.0), lymphocyte count of 4.0 (IQR: 2.6, 5.9), monocyte count of 0.8 (IQR: 0.5, 1.3), hemoglobin level of 10.3(IQR: 8.4, 11.4), and white blood cell count of 9.5 (IQR: 5.9, 12.5).

Table 1. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of participants.

Variable Median, (IQR) OR frequency (%) SAM P value
Yes = 116(27.0) No = 313 (73.0%)
Age, months
6–24 322 (75.6) 103 (32) 219 (68.0) <0.001
25–59 107 (24.9) 13 (12.1) 94 (87.9)
Sex
Male 240 (55.9) 59 (24.6) 183 (75.4) 0.293
Female 189 (44.1) 55 (29.1) 134 (70.9)
Residence
Urban 271 (63.2) 67 (24.7) 204 (84.8) 0.256
Rural 158 (36.8) 47 (18.9) 111 (81.1)
HIV Status, n = 414
With HIV 42 (10.1) 23 (54.8) 19 (45.2) <0.001
Without HIV 372 (89.9) 86 (23.1) 286 (76.9)
Tuberculosis
Yes 44 (10.3) 30 (68.2) 14 (31.8) <0.001
No 385 (89.7) 84 (21.8) 301 (78.2)
Type of tuberculosis, n = 44 0.287
Pulmonary 24 (54.5) 18 (75.00) 6 (25.0)
Extra pulmonary 20 (45.5) 12 (60.0) 8 (40.0)
Comorbidities <0.001
Yes 102 (23.9) 41 (40.2) 61 (59.2)
No 327 (76.2) 73 (22.3) 254 (77.7)
Top Comorbidities, n = 52
Sickle cell disease 13 (25.5) 1 (7.7) 12 (92.3) 0.353
Anemia 10 (19.6) 4 (40.0) 6 (60.0)
Acute watery diarrhea 12 (23.5) 3 (25.0) 9 (75.0)
Pneumonia 9 (9.5) 4 (44.4) 5 (55.6)
acute pharyngotonsillitis 8 (8.4) 2 (25.0) 6 (75.0)
Malnutrition
Yes 180 (26.3)
No 249 (73.6)
Type of Malnutrition
SAM 116 (64.4)
MAM 64 (35.6)
Weight for Height Z score
> +3 5 (1.2)
≥+ 2 to <+3 8 (1.9)
≥ −2 to < +2 240 (56.3)
≥ −3 to <−2 84 (19.7)
<−3 89 (20.9)
Platelet count, x103 μl 351 (235,450)
Neutrophil count, x103 μl 5.0 (3.0, 8.0)
Lymphocyte count, x103 μl 4.0 (2.6, 5.9)
Monocyte count, x103 μl 0.8 (0.5, 1.3)
Hemoglobin, g/dl 10.3 (8.4, 11.4)
WBC, x103 μl 9.5 (5.9, 12.5)

Abbreviation: WBC White blood cells, SAM severe acute malnutrition, MAM Moderate acute malnutrition. Note: from a total of 44 cases of tuberculosis 30 cases were confirmed bacteriologically, while the rest of the cases were clinically diagnosed. While 89 with SAM were diagnosed using WHZ, 27 were clinically diagnosed.

Relationship between SAM with sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of participants

The prevalence of SAM among the participants was 27.0% (n = 116), Table 1. As compared with participants without SAM, those with SAM were younger (median 16 vs. 19 months) and were living with HIV (54.8% vs. 23.1%). SAM was more prevalent among those with TB when compared to those without TB (68.2% vs. 21.8%). Additionally, having comorbidities was significantly associated with SAM when compared to those without SAM (77.7% vs. 40.2%).

The median white blood cell count was not significantly different between those with and without SAM (9.7 vs. 8.9 x103/μl, p = 0.154) Fig 2A. Neutrophil counts were slightly lower in patients with SAM compared to those without SAM (3.89 vs. 5.37 x103/μl, p = 0.039), Fig 2B. Conversely, Lymphocyte counts among patients with SAM were higher compared to those without SAM (4.06 vs. 3.72 x103/μl, p = 0.035), Fig 2C. The median monocyte count was not significantly different between those with and without SAM (0.84 vs. 0.78 x103/μl, p = 0.823), Fig 2D. Platelet levels were higher in individuals with SAM compared to those without SAM (394 vs. 311 x103/μl, p = 0.006), Fig 2E. Hemoglobin levels (HB) were lower in individuals with SAM compared to those without SAM (9.0 vs. 10.6 g/dl, p = 0.002), Fig 2F.

Fig 2. Blood count parameters between those with and without severe acute malnutrition.

Fig 2

A. White blood cell count between those with (n = 77) and without SAM (n = 185). B. Neutrophil count between those with (n = 67) and without SAM (n = 167). C. Lymphocyte count between those with (n = 70) and without SAM (n = 170). D. Monocyte count between those with (n = 67) and without SAM (n = 167). E. Platelet count between those with (n = 71) and without SAM (n = 173). F. Hemoglobin level between those with (n = 78) and without SAM (n = 182). SAM, severe acute malnutrition. *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ns, p>0.05.

Univariable and multivariable analysis of factors associated with SAM

Table 2 shows results of univariable and adjusted multivariable analysis of factors associated with SAM. At univariable analysis, the age group 6–24 months were 3.4 times more likely to have SAM compared to the older group. Children living with HIV and TB had 4.4- and 9.7-times greater odds of having SAM compared to those without HIV and TB, respectively. Children with comorbidities were 2.3 times more likely to have SAM when compared to those without comorbidities.

Table 2. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

OR (95%Cl) P-value AOR (95%, Cl) P-Value
Age, months
6–24 3.40 (1.82, 6.36) 11.60 (3.34, 40.89) <0.001
25–59 1 1
HIV Status
Without HIV 1 1
With HIV 4.40 (2.27, 8.42) <0.001 3.90 (1.14, 13.7) 0.034
Tuberculosis
No 1 1
Yes 9.70 (4.71, 19.36) <0.001 22.3 (4.53,110.3) <0.001
Comorbidities
No 1 1
Yes 2.30 (1.40, 3.60) <0.001 2.50 (1.13, 5.88) 0.024
Platelet count, x103 μl 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) 0.180 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) * 0.027
Neutrophil count, x103 μl 0.90 (0.87,1.00) 0.050 0.90 (0.90, 1.25) 0.162
Lymphocyte count, x103 μl 1.08 (0.99, 1.19) 0.097 1.06 (0.23, 1.85) 0.428

* rounded off to two decimal places. Original is 1.000 (1.000, 1.001)

At multivariable analysis the age group 6–24 months were 11.6 times more likely to have SAM when compared to those who were older. Children living with HIV had 3.9 times higher odds of having SAM compared to those without HIV. Children who were treated for TB had 22.3 times higher odds of having SAM compared to those without TB. Children with comorbidities were 2.5 times more likely to have SAM compared to those without. Every unit increase in platelet count was associated with increased odds of having SAM by 1.0 (AOR: 1.0: 95%Cl: 1.00, 1.0001 p<0.027).

Discussion

The study objective aimed to determine the prevalence and correlates of SAM among pediatric patients at Livingstone University Teaching hospital. The present study found a prevalence of 27% of SAM. Other studies have reported varying prevalence rates of SAM; in Sudan, Mali and Ethiopia a prevalence of 6.5%, 4.4% and 21.2%, respectively, was reported [2123]. Several factors likely contribute to the high burden of SAM in our setting, including a high prevalence of comorbidities like HIV and TB, limited access to healthcare, and low socioeconomic status further exacerbated by high food prices [13, 2428].

In the present study, age was significantly associated with the nutritional status of the children. Children in the 6–24-month age group were more likely to have SAM. This finding is consistent with studies conducted in Nepal (2020), Nigeria (2020), and Ethiopia (2022) [2628]. This may happen because younger children (6–24 months) have smaller stomachs compared to older children, requiring frequent meals to meet their energy demands [26, 27]. This period is also a transition phase between breastfeeding and complementary feeding, which in most cases is inadequate due to food unaffordability in our area [26, 29]. Additionally, this period is characterized by increased energy expenditure and nutritional demands [26, 27].

The present study revealed that children living with HIV were more likely to have SAM. This study is consistent with other studies which have shown similar results like in Burkina Faso (2017) and Kenya (2019) [30, 31]. HIV infection increases the body’s nutritional needs by weakening the immune system, thus requiring more protein for immune cell production for metabolic processes [32]. Additionally, HIV and its treatments can impair nutrient absorption by damaging the intestinal lining, while chronic diarrhea caused by gut inflammation and damage further reduces nutrient absorption and contributes to fluid loss [32]. HIV also leads to muscle wasting by disrupting protein synthesis and metabolism [33]. This creates a vicious cycle, where malnutrition weakens the immune system, making individuals with HIV more susceptible to infections that worsen nutrient absorption and utilization [34].

TB has been shown to be associated with SAM as reported in Zambia (2017) and Nepal (2020) [35, 36]. Nutrition or its deficiency leads to impaired cell mediated and humoral immune responses, which in turn affects the ability of an individual to fight mycobacterium infection [37]. In our setting the incidence of TB is estimated at 333 cases per 100,000 population, ranking the country among the top 30 high-burden TB countries globally [38], hence the need to combat malnutrition.

Children with comorbidities were associated with SAM. The comorbidities prevalent were sickle cell disease, anemia, acute diarrheal disease, pneumonia and cerebral palsy consistent with studies by Baskaran et al (2018), Banga et al (2020) and Moate et al (2022) [3941]. Studies have shown that severe malnourished children with comorbidities have a higher mortality rate than those without [42]. This increased risk is primarily due to immune dysfunction [43]. This dysfunction affects both innate and adaptive immunity. Innate immunity is compromised by a weakened skin, respiratory, and gastrointestinal mucosal barrier [44]. Additionally, alterations to gut microbiota occur [44]. Adaptive immunity is also affected, with reduced dendritic cells, blood complement factors, delayed type hypersensitivity, and low B-cells in the blood [44]. Further, there is increased apoptosis in lymphocytes, and lymphatic tissue shows atrophy [44]. Therefore, clinicians should prioritize close follow-up for these children, focusing on the critical comorbidities [42].

In the current study, a unit increase in platelet count was associated with SAM similar to a study conducted in Ethiopia (2020). The possible reason for thrombocytosis could be attributed to infections that likely increase levels of inflammatory cytokines which in turn heightened production of thrombocytes [45].

The study has certain limitations. It utilized a retrospective cross-sectional design conducted solely at Livingstone University Teaching Hospital, potentially limiting the generalizability of findings to LUTH. Secondly, the attending clinician’s discretion, rather than the investigator’s assessment, formed the basis for SAM classification. This approach can introduce bias, as attending physicians may underestimate or overestimate severity. Thirdly, MUAC is not taken routinely and therefore was not included in the diagnosis. Lastly, although the sample size was adequate for the study goal, a larger sample size would increase power and is recommended in future studies. However, despite these constraints, the study offers valuable insights into the burden and factors associated with SAM, serving as a foundation for future research endeavors.

Conclusions

SAM remains high in our setting among under 5 years with younger age, HIV, TB comorbidities and platelet count positively associated. Therefore, targeted interventions are need to reduce SAM among children living with HIV and TB, particularly by intensifying treatment, continuing and strengthening nutrition services.

Supporting information

S1 Checklist. Strobe checklist.

(DOCX)

pone.0309122.s001.docx (32.2KB, docx)
S1 Dataset. Minimal dataset.

(XLSX)

pone.0309122.s002.xlsx (72.4KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Mandla N, Mackay C, Mda S. Prevalence of severe acute malnutrition and its effect on under-five mortality at a regional hospital in South Africa. South Afr J Clin Nutr. 2022;35: 149–154. doi: 10.1080/16070658.2021.2001928 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ngaboyeka G, Bisimwa G, Neven A, Mwene-Batu P, Kambale R, Kingwayi PP, et al. Association between diagnostic criteria for severe acute malnutrition and hospital mortality in children aged 6–59 months in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo: the Lwiro cohort study. Front Nutr. 2023;10. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2023.1075800 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bommer C, Mittal N, Vollmer S. The Impact of Nutritional Interventions on Child Health and Cognitive Development. Annu Rev Resour Econ. 2020;12: 345–366. doi: 10.1146/annurev-resource-110519-093256 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Suryawan A, Jalaludin MY, Poh BK, Sanusi R, Tan VMH, Geurts JM, et al. Malnutrition in early life and its neurodevelopmental and cognitive consequences: a scoping review. Nutr Res Rev. 2022;35: 136–149. doi: 10.1017/S0954422421000159 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.UNICEF/WHO/The World Bank. The World Bank: Joint Child Malnutrition Estimates (JME)—Levels and Trends in Malnutrition. In: UNICEF DATA [Internet]. 18 May 2023 [cited 6 Jun 2024]. https://data.unicef.org/resources/jme-report-2023/
  • 6.Otiti MI, Allen SJ. Severe acute malnutrition in low- and middle-income countries. Paediatr Child Health. 2021;31: 301–307. doi: 10.1016/j.paed.2021.05.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Simwanza NR, Kalungwe M, Karonga T, Mtambo CMM, Ekpenyong MS, Nyashanu M. Exploring the risk factors of child malnutrition in Sub-Sahara Africa: A scoping review. Nutr Health. 2023;29: 61–69. doi: 10.1177/02601060221090699 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Mudogo C. Vulnerability of Urban Poor Women and Children to the Triple Burden of Malnutrition: A Scoping Review of the Sub-Saharan Africa Environment. J Med Res. 2017 [cited 24 Mar 2024]. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Vulnerability-of-Urban-Poor-Women-and-Children-to-A-Mudogo/7cfa0d44259728cd8115c311b4093c7b5c0be74f
  • 9.Moyer JD, Bohl DK, Petry C, Scott A, Solórzano JR, Kuhn R. The persistent global burden of severe acute malnutrition: Cross-country estimates, models and forecasts. Glob Transit. 2020;2: 167–179. doi: 10.1016/j.glt.2020.07.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Chunga CC, Chalwe V, Banda K, Chilengi-Sakala S, Solomon H, Leonard C, et al. Factors Associated with Mortality Among Children Under Five Hospitalized with Severe Acute Malnutrition in Selected Provinces of Zambia: A Retrospective Review of Hospital Records. 2022.
  • 11.Zambia Statistical Agency. Goal 2: Zero Hunger—Zambia Data Portal. 2021 [cited 5 Jun 2024]. https://zambia.opendataforafrica.org/vlutny/goal-2-zero-hunger
  • 12.Sirotin N, Hoover D, Segal-Isaacson CJ, Shi Q, Adedimeji A, Mutimura E, et al. Structural determinants of food insufficiency, low dietary diversity and BMI: a cross-sectional study of HIV-infected and HIV-negative Rwandan women. BMJ Open. 2012;2: e000714. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000714 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Munthali T, Jacobs C, Sitali L, Dambe R, Michelo C. Mortality and morbidity patterns in under-five children with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) in Zambia: a five-year retrospective review of hospital-based records (2009–2013). Arch Public Health. 2015;73: 23. doi: 10.1186/s13690-015-0072-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.WHO. Identification of severe acute malnutrition in children 6–59 months of age. 2023 [cited 6 Jun 2024]. https://www.who.int/tools/elena/interventions/sam-identification
  • 15.Chitembo L. NATIONAL TUBERCULOSIS AND LEPROSY PROGRAMME. 2022. https://www.moh.gov.zm/wp-content/uploads/filebase/guidelines/tb_guidelines/4.-Consolidated-TB-Guidelines-for-Zambia-Final-Version.pdf
  • 16.Gerber G. Sickle Cell Disease—Hematology and Oncology. In: MSD Manual Professional Edition [Internet]. 2024 [cited 7 Jun 2024]. https://www.msdmanuals.com/professional/hematology-and-oncology/anemias-caused-by-hemolysis/sickle-cell-disease
  • 17.Consolini DM. Diarrhea in Children—Pediatrics. In: MSD Manual Professional Edition [Internet]. 2022 [cited 8 Jun 2024]. https://www.msdmanuals.com/professional/pediatrics/symptoms-in-infants-and-children/diarrhea-in-children
  • 18.WHO. Anaemia. 2024 [cited 8 Jun 2024]. https://www.who.int/data/nutrition/nlis/info/anaemia
  • 19.Cherian T, Mulholland EK, Carlin JB, Ostensen H, Amin R, de Campo M, et al. Standardized interpretation of paediatric chest radiographs for the diagnosis of pneumonia in epidemiological studies. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83: 353–359. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Casadei K, Kiel J. Anthropometric Measurement. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537315/ [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Arab Abdilahi M, Mawlid Nur A, Dahir Jibril A. Prevalence of Acute Malnutrition and Associated Factors Among Under-Five Children in Gursum District, Somali Region, Ethiopia. Sci J Public Health. 2020;8: 123. doi: 10.11648/j.sjph.20200804.15 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kanan SH, Swar M. Prevalence and outcome of severe malnutrition in children less than five-year-old in Omdurman Paediatric Hospital, Sudan. Sudan J Paediatr. 2016 [cited 21 Mar 2024]. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Prevalence-and-outcome-of-severe-malnutrition-in-in-Kanan-Swar/99a941e81e8659daa36d60baa0616dc19de08490 [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 23.Sangho O, Doumbia A, Samaké M, Traoré F, Traoré M, Iknane A. Prévalence de la malnutrition aigue chez les enfants de 6–59 mois dans le district sanitaire de Barouéli. 2013. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Pr%C3%A9valence-de-la-malnutrition-aigue-chez-les-de-le-Sangho-Doumbia/dd2cdcafd99bbcb0bdc714063164a23f6d8b7277
  • 24.Sullivan CN. Assessment of malnutrition in children under five years in Southern Province, Zambia. 2015. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Assessment-of-malnutrition-in-children-under-five-Sullivan/c52676a15f6dededd0b2eec6c2e2e2fb47e9d343
  • 25.Moramarco S, Amerio G, Ciarlantini C, Chipoma JK, Simpungwe MK, Nielsen-Saines K, et al. Community-Based Management of Child Malnutrition in Zambia: HIV/AIDS Infection and Other Risk Factors on Child Survival. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;13: 666. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13070666 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Hossain A, Niroula B, Duwal S, Ahmed S, Kibria MdG. Maternal profiles and social determinants of severe acute malnutrition among children under-five years of age: A case-control study in Nepal. Heliyon. 2020;6: e03849. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03849 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Anato A. Predictors of wasting among children under-five years in largely food insecure area of north Wollo, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. J Nutr Sci. 2022;11: e8. doi: 10.1017/jns.2022.8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Imam A, Hassan-Hanga F, Sallahdeen A, Farouk ZL. Socio-demographic and Household-Level Risk Factors for Severe Acute Malnutrition in Pre-school Children in North-Western Nigeria. J Trop Pediatr. 2020;66: 589–597. doi: 10.1093/tropej/fmaa018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Ryckman T, Beal T, Nordhagen S, Chimanya K, Matji J. Affordability of nutritious foods for complementary feeding in Eastern and Southern Africa. Nutr Rev. 2021;79: 35–51. doi: 10.1093/nutrit/nuaa137 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Poda GG, Hsu C-Y, Chao JC-J. Malnutrition is associated with HIV infection in children less than 5 years in Bobo-Dioulasso City, Burkina Faso: A case-control study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96: e7019. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007019 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.McHenry MS, Apondi E, Ayaya SO, Yang Z, Li W, Tu W, et al. Growth of young HIV-infected and HIV-exposed children in western Kenya: A retrospective chart review. PloS One. 2019;14: e0224295. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224295 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Sashindran VK, Thakur R. Malnutrition in HIV/AIDS: Aetiopathogenesis. Dumais N, editor. 2020 [cited 8 Jun 2024].
  • 33.Castaneda C. Muscle wasting and protein metabolism1. J Anim Sci. 2002;80: E98–E105. doi: 10.2527/animalsci2002.80E-Suppl_2E98x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Soliman Ashraf T, Alaaraj Nada M, Rogol Alan D. The link between malnutrition, immunity, infection, inflammation and growth: New pathological mechanisms. World J Adv Res Rev. 2022;15: 157–167. doi: 10.30574/wjarr.2022.15.1.0673 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Thakur J, Thakur R, Bhatta NK, Yadav SP, Singh R, Khanal B, et al. Prevalence of tuberculosis in severe acute malnutrition: a prospective observational study. 2020.
  • 36.Munthali T, Chabala C, Chama E, Mugode R, Kapata N, Musonda P, et al. Tuberculosis caseload in children with severe acute malnutrition related with high hospital based mortality in Lusaka, Zambia. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10: 206. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-2529-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Chandrasekaran P, Saravanan N, Bethunaickan R, Tripathy S. Malnutrition: Modulator of Immune Responses in Tuberculosis. Front Immunol. 2017;8: 1316. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01316 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lungu PS, Kabaso ME, Mihova R, Silumesii A, Chisenga T, Kasapo C, et al. Undernotification and underreporting of tuberculosis in Zambia: a national data quality assessment. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22: 1074. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08431-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Moate T, Rabie T, Minnie C, Mäenpää A. Comorbidities of Child Malnutrition in Low- and Medium-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2022;75: 400–410. doi: 10.1097/MPG.0000000000003558 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Baskaran VM, Naaraayan SA, Priyadharishini D. Comorbidities in children hospitalized with severe acute malnutrition. Indian Journal of Child Health. 2018. pp. 530–532. doi: 10.32677/IJCH.2018.v05.i08.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Banga D, Baren M, Ssonko NV, Sikakulya FK, Tibamwenda Y, Banga C, et al. Comorbidities and Factors Associated with Mortality among Children under Five Years Admitted with Severe Acute Malnutrition in the Nutritional Unit of Jinja Regional Referral Hospital, Eastern Uganda. Int J Pediatr. 2020;2020: 7809412. doi: 10.1155/2020/7809412 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Nass SS, Nass NS, Iliyasu Z, Suleiman B, Yahaya S, Habibu B, et al. Determinants of Mortality Among Severely Malnourished Children in Northern Nigeria. Health Serv Res Manag Epidemiol. 2021;8: 23333928211064089. doi: 10.1177/23333928211064089 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Bourke CD, Berkley JA, Prendergast AJ. Immune Dysfunction as a Cause and Consequence of Malnutrition. Trends Immunol. 2016;37: 386–398. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2016.04.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Rytter MJH, Kolte L, Briend A, Friis H, Christensen VB. The immune system in children with malnutrition—a systematic review. PloS One. 2014;9: e105017. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Getawa S, Getaneh Z, Melku M. Hematological Abnormalities and Associated Factors Among Undernourished Under-Five Children Attending University of Gondar Specialized Referral Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. J Blood Med. 2020;11: 465–478. doi: 10.2147/JBM.S284572 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Stephen Michael Graham

3 Jun 2024

PONE-D-24-15995Prevalence and Factors associated with Severe Acute Malnutrition among children under the age of 15 years.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr.  Masenga,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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 Jul 18 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Stephen Michael Graham, FRACP, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

3. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process.

4. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 1 and 2 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

5. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information. 

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

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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

**********

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: General comment

This paper describes the prevalence and identifies factors associated with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) among children <15 years in a regional hospital in Zambia. This is indeed a topic of public health importance given that severe malnutrition is the underlying cause of several childhood morbidities and contributes to mortality in Africa and other lower-resource settings.

The main problem of this paper is how the definition of SAM is applied in the study. Whereas the WHO definition of SAM applies to children between 6 months <5 years with specific criteria (presence of either WHZ <-3 standard deviation or MUAC<115mm or bilateral pitting oedema) the authors have applied only one of these parameters to define SAM, and have broadly used the definition to include children =>5 years with BMI for age <-3 SD who although technically are severely undernourished but they do not meet the definition of SAM.

I suggest the authors apply the definition as per WHO definition to children 6 months < 5 years and only include children in this age category in their analysis or use the term that can broadly encompass all forms of malnutrition or undernutrition if they wish to understand malnutrition more broadly in children <15 years.

Below are specific recommendations for each section:

Abstract

Background: Include a statement with the aim or hypothesis of the study.

Methods: Provide the definition of SAM and state inclusion criteria in this section

Results: Provide a summary of how many records were screened, and found eligible and clearly state the number of children the analysis is based on.

Introduction

Paragraph 3, Line 1: Review figures for the prevalence of undernutrition in Zambia which are much lower than those provided in the Zambia Demographic and Health Survey (https://www.zamstats.gov.zm/portfolio/zambia-demographic-and-health-survey-zdhs/) which provides a more countrywide representative figure than the reference used.

Methods

#Study design and setting:

A brief description of the hospital and the type of population served by the facility would help understand the settings in which this study was conducted.

#Eligibility/sampling:

Explicitly state what the study inclusion and exclusion criteria used. Were the participants selected hospitalised or recruited from ambulatory settings as well?

#Variables:

As stated in the general comments, the WHO criteria for SAM is: WHZ<-3 or MUAC<115 or the presence of bilateral pitting oedema in children 6mo <5years. Technically BMI for age <-3 in children above 5 years is described as “severe thinness” (https://www.who.int/tools/growth-reference-data-for-5to19-years/indicators/bmi-for-age )and is not interchangeable with SAM although it does provide a measure of severe undernutrition in this age group.

Were the classifications of SAM/malnutrition based on clinician diagnosis or the parameter (WHZ, BMI for age) calculated by the investigators using the clinical data? How were the data on the other parameters for SAM (MUAC or pitting oedema) dealt with?

# Sample size calculation:

• What was the rationale for inclusion of 10% non-response rate in a study that was primarily a retrospective review of patient records?

#On data collection:

• The procedures for data collection should be sufficiently described. How was the review of medical records structured? Was the SAM information extracted from the most recent medical visit or did it include any previous hospital visit? If there were multiple visits which instance was used?

• How was the screening of SAM structure in this institution? Do all children attending the hospital get a weight, height, and MUAC measurement?

• Did this review include hospital records over the stated study period only? If yes, how many <15 years were seen over this period in the hospital?

Results:

#Baseline characteristics

• Provide a summary of how many participant records were screened, found eligible, included, and analyzed. A flow chart could provide reason for exclusions of medical records.

• How many medical records were included in this analysis? Every 2nd record from a sample of 3000 implies there were 1,500 screened. How were the 695 finally selected for inclusion?

• Provide summary statements of the measures of malnutrition (WHZ, BMI) in the text or Table 1 to help understand the general nutritional status of the study cohort.

• The HIV prevalence among participants was approximately 9.2% (n=62). What was the denominator used here? 62/695 = 8.9%

• How many cases of tuberculosis were in this cohort? It’s not explicitly stated the number of tuberculosis cases in this cohort but only the proportion with pulmonary disease is provided in line 5 of the results.

• Both tables included are not referenced in the text in the results section to allow the reader to refer to the appropriate table.

• Table 1: Could you include how many TB cases were confirmed(bacteriologically) within the table or in the footnote?

Discussion:

• In paragraph 2, on the association between HIV and malnutrition, the authors reference adult studies only and do not refer to any relevant pediatric studies.

• In paragraph 6, apart from the retrospective nature of the study, where there any other limitations? How about the methods used to identify children with SAM? Some discussions on the limitations of the methods used to identify children with SAM should be included in this section.

• What is the implication of the findings for the care of children with malnutrition in this region or setting?

Reviewer #2: General comments:

The authors have chosen an important topic with high public importance and written the manuscript evaluating the prevalence and factors associated with SAM among children under the age of 15 years in an African country. The authors performed this study among under-15 children instead of under-5 children, although no rationality or data in favor of conducting this study in under-15 children are shown. The rationality should be elaboratively discussed in the background and briefly in abstract and need to have reflection all through the manuscript.

Specific comments:

Abstract

1. Please provide brief justification of conducting this study in under-15 children in the background

2. Please define SAM briefly in the methods

3. Usually abstract stands alone and thus before providing 16.7% prevalence in the results of abstract, the authors should provide the exact denominator and numerator here.

Background

4. Burden and fatality of SAM and related references used here are old and there are a number of recent data on these especially after 2022 and the authors should provide the most recent references all through the background.

5. The authors are requested to provide strong justification of conducting this study in under-15 children and need to have argument on how under-5 SAM aligns/differs to/from each other.

6. The background needs to have more connectivity with aims/objectives in the last paragraph.

Methods

Sample size

7. The evidence of 5% prevalence of SAM is used in calculating sample size in the Gambia, however, the prevalence was as high as 11% (https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/research/units/mrc-gambia/news/321426/mrc-nutrition-rehabilitation-centre-caring-children-severe-acute-malnutrition). The authors need to justify the selecting the lower prevalence for calculating the sample size.

Variables

8. There should have a brief description (a paragraph) on the procedure of the anthropometric measurement (weight, length/height, BMI) in children

9. Please correct acute diarrheal diarrhea as acute watery diarrhea with its definition

10. Please also define anemia, pneumonia, sickle cell disease, tuberculosis (bacteriological/clinical)

Data collection and data analysis

11. As data is a plural noun, please revise the grammar accordingly all through the text.

Results

Basic characteristic of the study participants

12. Definition of MAM should be provided in the methods before its use in the results.

13. Elaboration of SAM has already used earlier in the text, thus, this is redundant here.

14. All statistical values shown in the text of the results (Basic characteristic of the study participants and Univariable and multivariable analysis of factors associated severe acute malnutrition) are also available in the relevant tables. Please refer the tables for the statistical values rather duplicating these values in the text.

Discussion

15. Again, the elaboration of SAM has already used earlier in the text, thus, this is also redundant here.

16. The discussion section is less organized especially this section need to focus on most important observation with more explicit evidences.

17. The authors need to provide argument with evidences on how under-5 SAM aligns/differs to/from each other.

18. The observation of the association of an increase in neutrophil count with decreased odds of SAM should be discussed with more insights especially with the relation poor inflammatory responses in SAM.

18. Conclusion should be revised (deducting severe acute malnutrition or SAM) making a link with implication of the study.

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

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.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PlosOne SAM ZM review comments.docx

pone.0309122.s003.docx (20KB, docx)
Attachment

Submitted filename: Review reports_PONE-D-24-15995.doc

pone.0309122.s004.doc (29KB, doc)
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 26;19(8):e0309122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309122.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


12 Jun 2024

Ref: RESPONSES TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS

We would like to thank the reviewers for taking the time to make suggestions that have improved our manuscript. We have extensively revised the manuscript and addressed all concerns and suggestions. We now hope the current manuscript is acceptable for publication. Below are the point-by-point responses to all comments and suggestions.

Reviewer #1: General comment

This paper describes the prevalence and identifies factors associated with severe acute malnutrition (SAM) among children <15 years in a regional hospital in Zambia. This is indeed a topic of public health importance given that severe malnutrition is the underlying cause of several childhood morbidities and contributes to mortality in Africa and other lower-resource settings.

The main problem of this paper is how the definition of SAM is applied in the study. Whereas the WHO definition of SAM applies to children between 6 months <5 years with specific criteria (presence of either WHZ <-3 standard deviation or MUAC<115mm or bilateral pitting oedema) the authors have applied only one of these parameters to define SAM, and have broadly used the definition to include children =>5 years with BMI for age <-3 SD who although technically are severely undernourished but they do not meet the definition of SAM.

I suggest the authors apply the definition as per WHO definition to children 6 months < 5 years and only include children in this age category in their analysis or use the term that can broadly encompass all forms of malnutrition or undernutrition if they wish to understand malnutrition more broadly in children <15 years.

Response: Thank you, since most children presenting with SAM were under 5 years old, we have truncated the data to include only children between 6 months and under 5 years old, following the WHO SAM definition as suggested. We thank the reviewer for this suggestion.

Below are specific recommendations for each section:

Abstract

Background: Include a statement with the aim or hypothesis of the study.

Response: Thank you. We have done so. The aim of the study has been added

Methods: Provide the definition of SAM and state inclusion criteria in this section

Response: we have now defined SAM and provided the inclusion criteria in this section.

Results: Provide a summary of how many records were screened, and found eligible and clearly state the number of children the analysis is based on.

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. We have now clarified this. In addition, we have adopted the reviewer’s earlier suggestion to truncate the data and include only include children 6months -<5 years

Introduction

Paragraph 3, Line 1: Review figures for the prevalence of undernutrition in Zambia which are much lower than those provided in the Zambia Demographic and Health Survey (https://www.zamstats.gov.zm/portfolio/zambia-demographic-and-health-survey-zdhs/) which provides a more countrywide representative figure than the reference used.

Response: Thanks very much: we have provided prevalence as per Zambia demographic survey published data.

Methods

#Study design and setting:

A brief description of the hospital and the type of population served by the facility would help understand the settings in which this study was conducted.

Response: We have included this information. Thank you for the suggestion

#Eligibility/sampling:

Explicitly state what the study inclusion and exclusion criteria used. Were the participants selected hospitalized or recruited from ambulatory settings as well?

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. All children came through the outpatient department and once they were found to be malnourished or where in a serious state as determined by the attending doctor, they were hospitalized. By default, those with SAM were immediately hospitalized. The majority of children included in this study were therefore hospitalized. We have now clarified this under methods-eligibility criteria

#Variables:

As stated in the general comments, the WHO criteria for SAM is: WHZ<-3 or MUAC<115 or the presence of bilateral pitting oedema in children 6mo <5years. Technically BMI for age <-3 in children above 5 years is described as “severe thinness” (https://www.who.int/tools/growth-reference-data-for-5to19-years/indicators/bmi-for-age )and is not interchangeable with SAM although it does provide a measure of severe undernutrition in this age group.

Were the classifications of SAM/malnutrition based on clinician diagnosis or the parameter (WHZ, BMI for age) calculated by the investigators using the clinical data? How were the data on the other parameters for SAM (MUAC or pitting oedema) dealt with?

Response: Thank you for this suggestion. We have now clarified this in the manuscript. We applied the clinical and WHZ criteria to define SAM and we have now only included children 6mo <5years following WHO criteria. This was a good suggestion, and we thank the reviewer for pointing out this.

# Sample size calculation:

• What was the rationale for inclusion of 10% non-response rate in a study that was primarily a retrospective review of patient records?

Response: We apologize for using a terminology that would apply to primary data. What we meant by 10% non-response is Mainly to account for variables with incomplete/missing data especially on important variables such as the outcome. We have now corrected this.

#On data collection:

• The procedures for data collection should be sufficiently described. How was the review of medical records structured? Was the SAM information extracted from the most recent medical visit or did it include any previous hospital visit? If there were multiple visits which instance was used?

Response: thanks you for the suggestion. Data was collected from the most recent medical visits. We have now written it more clearly.

• How was the screening of SAM structure in this institution? Do all children attending the hospital get a weight, height, and MUAC measurement?

Response: thank you. All children attending the pediatric departments are measured for weight and height, however sometimes MUAC is not taken routinely and therefore not included. We have therefore included this in the limitation section

• Did this review include hospital records over the stated study period only? If yes, how many <15 years were seen over this period in the hospital?

Response: No. The period stated was for data abstraction. The files were for patients in the year 2020 to 2022. We have now written out this more clearly in the manuscript. However, following your suggestion to truncate and only include <5 years, the total number of files reduced. We also want to clearly state that because of poor record keeping, and also that all files are kept together regardless of age (<5 years vs >5 years but <15years) the total number is an estimation from the records counted. Some files may have been missed at the time. We have included this as well in the limitation section. Thank you

Results:

#Baseline characteristics

• Provide a summary of how many participant records were screened, found eligible, included, and analyzed. A flow chart could provide reason for exclusions of medical records. How many medical records were included in this analysis? Every 2nd record from a sample of 3000 implies there were 1,500 screened. How the 695 were finally selected for inclusion?

Response: we have now included this information and a flowchart included as figure 1. This information is reported in the methods section and not results to avoid disrupting flow.

• Provide summary statements of the measures of malnutrition (WHZ, BMI) in the text or Table 1 to help understand the general nutritional status of the study cohort.

Response: thank you, the information has been added to table 1

• The HIV prevalence among participants was approximately 9.2% (n=62). What was the denominator used here? 62/695 = 8.9%

Response: thank you. The prevalence after reanalyzing was 10.1% (n=44) with determinator of 414. 15 records had missing variables on the HIV status. This is now indicated clearly

• How many cases of tuberculosis were in this cohort? It’s not explicitly stated the number of tuberculosis cases in this cohort but only the proportion with pulmonary disease is provided in line 5 of the results.

Response: Thank you, the information of number of TB cases have been included.

• Both tables included are not referenced in the text in the results section to allow the reader to refer to the appropriate table.

Response: thank you. The tables have now been referenced

• Table 1: Could you include how many TB cases were confirmed (bacteriologically) within the table or in the footnote?

Response: thank you very much. The information has been added in the footnote of the table

Discussion:

• In paragraph 2, on the association between HIV and malnutrition, the authors reference adult studies only and do not refer to any relevant pediatric studies.

Response: thanks very. Appropriate reference pertaining to children have been added.

• In paragraph 6, apart from the retrospective nature of the study, where there any other limitations? How about the methods used to identify children with SAM? Some discussions on the limitations of the methods used to identify children with SAM should be included in this section.

Response: Thank you for the suggestion. Indeed that is limitation and has been included.

• What is the implication of the findings for the care of children with malnutrition in this region or setting?

Response: targeted intervention are need to reduce SAM among children living with HIV and TB, particularly by intensifying treatment, continuing and strengthening nutrition services. Because its important, We have highlighted this in the conclusion. Thank you for the suggestion.

REVIEWER #2: GENERAL COMMENTS:

The authors have chosen an important topic with high public importance and written the manuscript evaluating the prevalence and factors associated with SAM among children under the age of 15 years in an African country. The authors performed this study among under-15 children instead of under-5 children, although no rationality or data in favor of conducting this study in under-15 children are shown. The rationality should be elaboratively discussed in the background and briefly in abstract and need to have reflection all through the manuscript.

Response: Thank you, since most children presenting with SAM were under 5 years old, we have truncated the results to include only children between 6 months and 5 years old, following the WHO SAM definition as suggested by reviewer 1.

Specific comments:

Abstract

1. Please provide brief justification of conducting this study in under-15 children in the background

Response: Thank you, since most children presenting with SAM were under 5 years old, we have now focused more on under 5 year patients as suggested by reviewer 1

2. Please define SAM briefly in the methods

Response: thank you, we have now defined SAM and provided the inclusion criteria in this section.

3. Usually abstract stands alone and thus before providing 16.7% prevalence in the results of abstract, the authors should provide the exact denominator and numerator here.

Response: thank you, we have added the information.

Background

4. Burden and fatality of SAM and related references used here are old and there are a number of recent data on these especially after 2022 and the authors should provide the most recent references all through the background.

Response: thank you, the references have now been updated.

5. The authors are requested to provide strong justification of conducting this study in under-15 children and need to have argument on how under-5 SAM aligns/differs to/from each other.

Response: Thank you, based on reviewer 1 suggestions this has now changed. since most children presenting with SAM were under 5 years old, we have now focused more on under 5-year patients as suggested by reviewer 1

6. The background needs to have more connectivity with aims/objectives in the last paragraph.

Response: we have revised accordingly and thank you for the suggestion.

Methods

Sample size

7. The evidence of 5% prevalence of SAM is used in calculating sample size in the Gambia, however, the prevalence was as high as 11% (https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/research/units/mrc-gambia/news/321426/mrc-nutrition-rehabilitation-centre-caring-children-severe-acute-malnutrition). The authors need to justify the selecting the lower prevalence for calculating the sample size.

Response: thank you, we calculated a using a prevalence of 5 % based on a study carried out in Zambia and based on country estimate of malnutrition by Zambia statistical agency of around 5%( https://www.zamstats.gov.zm/portfolio/zambia-demographic-and-health-survey-zdhs/) .

Variables

8. There should have a brief description (a paragraph) on the procedure of the anthropometric measurement (weight, length/height, BMI) in children

Response: thank you for the suggestion. We have added this information.

9. Please correct acute diarrheal diarrhea as acute watery diarrhea with its definition

Response: thank you. We have corrected the term accordingly and defined according to the guidelines

10. Please also define anemia, pneumonia, sickle cell disease, tuberculosis (bacteriological/clinical)

Response: thank you. We have added the definition of these terms.

Data collection and data analysis

11. As data is a plural noun, please revise the grammar accordingly all through the text.

Response: thank you, grammar has been revised accordingly.

Results

Basic characteristic of the study participants

12. Definition of MAM should be provided in the methods before its use in the results.

Response: thank you, the definition has been added

13. Elaboration of SAM has already used earlier in the text, thus, this is redundant here.

Response: thank you, correction has been made.

14. All statistical values shown in the text of the results (Basic characteristic of the study participants and Univariable and multivariable analysis of factors associated severe acute malnutrition) are also available in the relevant tables. Please refer the tables for the statistical values rather duplicating these values in the text.

Response: thank you, correction has been made

Discussion

15. Again, the elaboration of SAM has already used earlier in the text, thus, this is also redundant here.

Response: thank you for the suggestion, correction has been made

16. The discussion section is less organized especially this section need to focus on most important observation with more explicit evidences.

Response: we have now only focused on significant results from multivariable analysis. Thank you

17. The authors need to provide argument with evidences on how under-5 SAM aligns/differs to/from each other.

Response: The study is now only around under 5 year olds as opposed to <15. We have also compared age groups 6- 24 vs 25 -59 for more meaningful or relevance.

18. The observation of the association of an increase in neutrophil count with decreased odds of SAM should be discussed with more insights especially with the relation poor inflammatory responses in SAM.

Response: thank you for the suggestion. The observation have been revised with more insight

18. Conclusion should be revised (deducting severe acute malnutrition or SAM) making a link with implication of the study.

Response: thank very. The conclusion has been revised

We have extensively revised the manuscript and addressed all concerns raised by the reviewers and editor. We want to thank you all again for the tremendous work and time that you committed in editing our work. Our manuscript is much improved, and we are very grateful.

All authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Yours sincerely,

Prof Sepiso K. Masenga, BSc., MSc., PhD., FGHF., PGDip

Attachment

Submitted filename: RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS.pdf

pone.0309122.s005.pdf (238.6KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Stephen Michael Graham

2 Jul 2024

PONE-D-24-15995R1Severe Acute Malnutrition among children under the age of 5 years.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Masenga,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’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 Aug 16 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ 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 academic 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'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. 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,

Steve

Stephen Michael Graham, FRACP, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

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.

[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: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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

**********

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: The authors have addressed the issues raised in the first review> A few points for clarification and consideration below.

Thank you for considering the suggestion on the inclusion of the participants' flow chart. According to the strobe guidance flow charts describing the participants should be included in the results sections

Table 1: Include the means of the haematological parameters comparing those with SAM vs No SAM

Could the authors review the confidence intervals for the adjusted analysis for the platelet count in table 2?

Reviewer #2: The overall quality of the revised manuscript improved a lot. The authors should be congratulated for that. However, I have minor concerns about the following three definitions that need to be revised before the acceptance of this manuscript.

1. The authors mentioned that clinical diagnosis of TB was made when bacteriological criteria were not met but the authors did not mention the clinical criteria used for clinical TB diagnosis. These criteria should be precisely written.

2. The authors defined acute watery diarrhea as ‘frequent loose or watery stools lasting less than 2 weeks’ which is not precise as this should be defined as ‘more than three loose or watery stools per day lasting less than 2 weeks (WHO Pocket Book 2013, 2nd edition, page 125)’

3. The authors defined pneumonia as ‘a lung infection caused by bacteria or viruses, diagnosed using either a chest radiograph or clinically through vital sign measurement’, this is not a precise definition at all. The authors should use the better reference (PMID: 15976876) for chest radiograph defining pneumonia and must need to mention the clinical features used for diagnosing pneumonia/severe pneumonia. The authors may take the help from WHO Pocket Book 2013, 2nd edition, page 80).

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

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 One. 2024 Aug 26;19(8):e0309122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309122.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


2 Jul 2024

To the reviewers and Editor,

Ref: RESPONSES TO REVIEWER’S COMMENTS

We would like to thank the reviewers for taking the time to make suggestions that have improved our manuscript. We have now made revisions to the minor comments in the manuscript and incorporated all suggestions. We now hope the current manuscript is acceptable for publication. Below are the point-by-point responses to all comments and suggestions.

Reviewer #1: General comment

Thank you for considering the suggestion on the inclusion of the participants' flow chart. According to the strobe guidance flow charts describing the participants should be included in the results sections

Response: We have now moved the flow chart to the results section. Thank you for this suggestion

Table 1: Include the means of the haematological parameters comparing those with SAM vs No SAM

Response: We have included them. Thank you.

Could the authors review the confidence intervals for the adjusted analysis for the platelet count in table 2?

Response: The confidence interval are 1.000 (1.000, 1.001) so we just rounded them off to 2 decimal places to maintain consistence with other values in the table. For clarity, we have included this in the footnote. Thank you.

Reviewer #2: The overall quality of the revised manuscript improved a lot. The authors should be congratulated for that. However, I have minor concerns about the following three definitions that need to be revised before the acceptance of this manuscript.

1. The authors mentioned that clinical diagnosis of TB was made when bacteriological criteria were not met but the authors did not mention the clinical criteria used for clinical TB diagnosis. These criteria should be precisely written.

Response: Thank you for your kind remarks. We have now written the clinical diagnosis. The criterion included a medical history, TB contact, physical examination, chest x-ray and a positive tuberculin skin test). Thank you!

2. The authors defined acute watery diarrhea as ‘frequent loose or watery stools lasting less than 2 weeks’ which is not precise as this should be defined as ‘more than three loose or watery stools per day lasting less than 2 weeks (WHO Pocket Book 2013, 2nd edition, page 125)’

Response: Thank you for the precise definition. We have now included it.

3. The authors defined pneumonia as ‘a lung infection caused by bacteria or viruses, diagnosed using either a chest radiograph or clinically through vital sign measurement’, this is not a precise definition at all. The authors should use the better reference (PMID: 15976876) for chest radiograph defining pneumonia and must need to mention the clinical features used for diagnosing pneumonia/severe pneumonia. The authors may take the help from WHO Pocket Book 2013, 2nd edition, page 80).

Response: Thank you for suggesting the precise definitions. We have now included. Much appreciated.

We have revised the manuscript and addressed all concerns raised by the reviewers. We want to thank you all again for the tremendous work and time that you committed in editing our work. Our manuscript is much improved, and we are very grateful.

Yours sincerely,

Sepiso K. Masenga, BSc., MSc., PhD., FGHF., PGDip

Associate Professor of Human Pathology,

Chair/Director of Hypertension, HIV/AIDS, Nutrition, Diabetes and Dyslipidemia (HAND) Research Group

Coordinator Postgraduate programs

Head of Physiological Sciences Department

Academic Editor – Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

Editorial board member - PLOS ONE

Editorial board member – BMC infectious diseases

Attachment

Submitted filename: RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS 002.pdf

pone.0309122.s006.pdf (161.3KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 2

James Mockridge

7 Aug 2024

Severe Acute Malnutrition among children under the age of 5 years.

PONE-D-24-15995R2

Dear Dr. Masenga,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

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 onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

James Mockridge

Staff Editor

PLOS ONE

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 #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

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

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). 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 #2: No

**********

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

PLOS ONE 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 #2: 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 #2: The authors kindly addressed all the issues raised by the reviewers. Thus, the revised manuscript may be accepted in its present form.

**********

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.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

James Mockridge

14 Aug 2024

PONE-D-24-15995R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Masenga,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr James Mockridge

Staff Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Checklist. Strobe checklist.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0309122.s001.docx (32.2KB, docx)
    S1 Dataset. Minimal dataset.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0309122.s002.xlsx (72.4KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PlosOne SAM ZM review comments.docx

    pone.0309122.s003.docx (20KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Review reports_PONE-D-24-15995.doc

    pone.0309122.s004.doc (29KB, doc)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS.pdf

    pone.0309122.s005.pdf (238.6KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS 002.pdf

    pone.0309122.s006.pdf (161.3KB, pdf)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES