Skip to main content
. 2025 Apr 28;122(1):185–195. doi: 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.04.022

TABLE 6.

Pooled effects of MMS compared with IFA on MUAC, MUACZ, and low MUAC (fixed effects).

Effect of MMS vs. IFA MUAC (cm)
MUACZ score
Low MUAC (MUACZ <−2)
No. of studies No. of infants Mean difference (95% CI), fixed effects No. of studies No. of infants Mean difference (95% CI), fixed effects Risk ratio (95% CI), fixed effects
Birth 5 17781 0.11 (0.08, 0.13) N.A. N.A. N.A, N.A.
3 months 6 20937 0.08 (0.06, 0.11) 6 20733 0.07 (0.05, 0.10) 0.90 (0.82, 0.99)
6 months 8 15388 0.02 (-0.01, 0.05) 8 15382 0.02 (-0.01, 0.05) 0.99 (0.88, 1.11)
12 months 6 14788 0.02 (-0.01, 0.06) 6 14784 0.02 (-0.01, 0.05) 0.99 (0.90, 1.09)
18 months 4 1490 0.06 (-0.05, 0.17) 4 1490 0.06 (-0.03, 0.16) 0.91 (0.52, 1.59)
24 months 4 8659 -0.01 (-0.05, 0.03) 3 7299 -0.01 (-0.05, 0.03) 0.92 (0.83, 1.02)

The table shows the generic inverse variance weighted pooled mean differences or pooled risk ratios with their corresponding 95% CIs comparing MMS and IFA intervention groups. Number of infants were calculated from effective sample sizes.

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; IFA, iron and folic acid supplementation; MMS, multiple micronutrient supplementation; MUAC, mid-upper arm circumference; MUACZ, mid-upper arm circumference z-score; N.A., non applicable.