Skip to main content
. 2019 Oct 30;16(1):e12898. doi: 10.1111/mcn.12898

Table 2.

Summary of review results

Author, year, study design Location, sample size, target age, and admission criteria Intervention treatment Control treatment Food product better than control? Risk of bias score§

(Nikièma et al., 2014)

Cluster RCT

Burkina Faso

N = 1,974

6–24 months,

WHZ < −2 and ≥3

  1. Locally produced RUSF

  2. Supercereal Plus

 Child‐centred counselling (CCC) Yes, better anthropometric recovery due to lower default ++/+
Micronutrients provided to control groups

(M. Hossain et al., 2012; M. I. Hossain & Ahmed, 2014; M. I. Hossain & Yasmin, 2016)

(conference abstracts)

Cluster RCT

Bangladesh

N = 227

6–24 months, WHZ < −2 and ≥−3
  1. Cereal‐based supplement (SF)
  2. Cereal supplement and psychosocial stimulation (SF + PS)

  1. Health education and micronutrients at hospital (HC)

  2. Health education and micronutrients at clinic (CC)

  3. Psychosocial stimulation (PS)

 Maybe, Not possible to distinguish between benefits of supplement versus psychosocial stimulation −/−

(Javan et al., 2017)

RCT

Iran

N = 70

9–24 months,

WHZ <−2 & ≥−3 and referred for treatment

 Blended flour supplementary food (chickpea, rice, wheat, barley, sugar) + multivitamins + nutritional counselling (SF) Multivitamins + nutritional counselling (C) Yes, better recovery, weight gain and WLZ gain ++/++
Not recruited based on current mam definitions

(van der Kam, 2017)

RCT

Nigeria

N = 2,213

(25% of sample had MAM at enrolment)

6–59 months, Diagnosed with malaria,

diarrhoea, or LRTI
  1. RUTF, one sachet per day

1.Micronutrients, two sachets/d (MNP)

2.No supplement (C)

 No – incidence of SAM was same for RUTF group to MNP group and no supplement group. ++/+

(Roy et al., 2005)

Cluster RCT

Bangladesh

N = 282

6–24 months,

Weight‐for‐age 61% ‐ 75% of median (NCHS)
  1. Intensive nutrition education + supplementary feeding (INE + SF)

  1. Standard nutrition education (C)

  2. Intensive nutrition education (INE)

 Yes, better immediate and sustained recovery ++/+

(Fauveau et al., 1992)

RCT

Bangladesh

N = 134

6–12 months,

MUAC > 11.0 and <12.9 cm, and living in bamboo structure

 Supplementary food (rice, wheat, lentils, and oil; SF) Nutrition education (C) Maybe, food group have larger weight gain in first 3 months but not whole 6 months ++/+
Not recruited based on current mam definitions and micronutrients provided to control groups

(M. I. Hossain et al., 2011)

RCT

Bangladesh

N = 507

(81% of sample had WHZ <−2 at baseline)

6–24 months,

WAZ < −3 (NCHS) and recovered from diarrhoea at the hospital
  1. Health education and micronutrients at clinic + cereal‐based supplement (C–SF)
  2. Health education and micronutrients at clinic + cereal supplement and psychosocial stimulation (C–SF + PS)

1.Health education and micronutrients at hospital (HC)

2.Health education and micronutrients at clinic (CC)

3. Health education and micronutrients at clinic + psychosocial stimulation (C–PS)

 Yes, better WLZ and LAZ gain. ++/+

(Heikens et al., 1989)

RCT

Jamaica

N = 82

3–36 months,

WAZ < 80% of median (NCHS)

 High energy supplement for 3 months plus weekly home visits and micronutrient supplements for 6 months (HES) Home visits and micronutrient supplements for 6 months (HV) Yes, better WAZ after 3 months but no difference after 6 months. But better HAZ after 6 months +/+
Preventative trials: majority adequately nourished children in sample

(Schlossman et al., 2017)

Pilot cluster‐ RCT

Guinea Bissau

N = 681

6–59 months, WHZ < 2 or WAZ < 1 or HAZ < 2

  1. RUSF with 15% protein

  2. RUSF with 33% protein

 No intervention (C) No, controls improved an equal extent to food group +/−

(Christian et al., 2015)

Cluster RCT

Bangladesh

N = 5,421

6 months,

All infants in the catchment area

  1. RUSF–R, rice‐lentil based

  2. RUSF–C, chickpea based

  3. RUSF–S, soy based

  4. Wheat–soy‐blend++ (WSB)

  1. Nutrition counselling (C)

Yes, for RUSF‐S,

No benefit of WSB++ over counselling

 ++/++

(Grellety et al., 2012)

Prospective cohort

Niger

N = 2,238

(18% of sample WHZ < −2)

6–23 months,

All children 60–80 cm length

 1. RUSF–soy (LNS–MQ)

  1. No supplementation (failed to register; C)

 Yes, better MUAC and WLZ gain and lower mortality rate +/−

Note. Risk of bias score is presented as internal/external score; (−) Poor quality, (+) Adequate quality, (++) good quality. See “WFP Specialized Nutritious Food Sheet” for detailed definitions of common supplements (WFP, 2018); see individual papers for full details of nutrient content of each supplement.

Abbreviations: LRTI, lower respiratory tract infection; WHZ, weight‐for‐height Z‐score; WAZ, weight‐for‐age Z‐score; RUSF, ready‐to‐use supplementary food; CSB++, micronutrient fortified corn–soy‐blended flour, now commonly termed “Supercereal Plus” (UNICEF, 2016); RCT; randomized controlled trial; LNS–MQ, lipid‐based nutrient supplement medium quantity.