Search

Introduction: Approximately 40% of children aged 6-59 months worldwide are anaemic. Iron-containing multiple micronutrient powders (MNPs) and iron supplements (syrup/drops) are used to combat anaemia in children in different parts of the world. However, evidence for functional benefits of iron supplementation in children is scarce, and potential risks remain poorly defined, particularly concerning diarrhoea and malaria. This trial aims to determine if: (1) the efficacy of iron supplements or MNPs (containing iron) given with malaria chemoprevention is superior to malaria chemoprevention alone, or (2) if the efficacy of malaria chemoprevention alone is superior to placebo on child cognitive development., Methods and Analysis: IRMA is a four-arm, parallel-group, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, triple-dummy, randomised trial in Southern Malawi. The study recruits 2168 infants aged 6 months, with an intervention period of 6 months and a post-intervention period of a further 6 months. Children are randomised into four arms: (1) No intervention (placebo); (2) malaria chemoprevention only; (3) MNPs and malaria chemoprevention; and (4) iron syrup and malaria chemoprevention. The primary outcome, cognitive development (Cognitive Composite Score (CogCS)), is measured at the end of the 6 months intervention. Secondary outcomes include CogCS at a further 6 months post-intervention, motor, language and behavioural development, physical growth and prevalence of anaemia and iron deficiency. Safety outcomes include incidence of malaria and other infections, and prevalence of malaria parasitaemia during and post-intervention period., Ethics and Dissemination: The trial is approved by the National Health Sciences Research Committee (#19/01/2213) (Malawi) and the Human Research Ethics Committee (WEHI: 19/012) (Australia). Written informed consent in the local language is obtained from each participant before conducting any study-related procedure. Results will be shared with the local community and internationally with academic and policy stakeholders., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12620000386932., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

The accuracy of haemoglobin concentration measurements is crucial for deriving global anaemia prevalence estimates and monitoring anaemia reduction strategies. In this analysis, we examined and quantified the factors affecting preanalytic and analytic variation in haemoglobin concentrations. Using cross-sectional data from three field studies (in children, pregnant and nonpregnant women), we examined the difference in haemoglobin concentration between venous-drawn and capillary-drawn blood measured by HemoCue (ie, preanalytic) and modelled how the bias observed may affect anaemia prevalence estimates in population surveys and anaemia public health severity classification across countries. Using data from an international quality assurance programme, we examined differences due to instrumentation from 16 different haematology analyzers (ie, analytic). Results indicated that capillary and venous haemoglobin concentrations are not in agreement (bias +5.7 g/L (limits of agreement (LoA) -11.2, 22.6) in preschool age children; range from -28 g/L to +20 g/L in pregnant women; bias +8.8 g/L (LoA -5.2, 22.9) in non-pregnant women). The bias observed could introduce changes in population survey estimates of anaemia of up to -20.7 percentage points in children and -28.2 percentage points in non-pregnant women after venous adjustment. Analytic variation was minimal and unlikely to influence the diagnosis of anaemia. These findings suggest that global estimates of anaemia prevalence derived from capillary haemoglobin, as they often are, may be inaccurate and lead to erroneous public health severity classification, but that point-of-care, or other, instruments should not introduce variation if properly used., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Economic evaluations of complex interventions in early child development are required to guide policy and programme development, but a few are yet available., Methods and Analysis: Although significant gains have been made in maternal and child health in resource-constrained environments, this has mainly been concentrated on improving physical health. The Learning Clubs programme addresses both physical and mental child and maternal health. This study is an economic evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial of the impact of the Learning Clubs programme in Vietnam. It will be conducted from a societal perspective and aims to identify the cost-effectiveness and the economic and social returns of the intervention. A total of 1008 pregnant women recruited from 84 communes in a rural province in Vietnam will be included in the evaluation. Health and cost data will be gathered at three stages of the trial and used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per percentage point improvement of infant's development, infant's health and maternal common mental disorders expressed in quality-adjusted life years gained. The return on investment will be calculated based on improvements in productivity, the results being expressed as benefit-cost ratios., Ethics and Dissemination: The trial was approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Certificate Number 2016-0683), Australia, and approval was extended to include the economic evaluation (Amendment Review Number 2018-0683-23806); and the Institutional Review Board of the Hanoi School of Public Health (Certificate Number 017-377IDD- YTCC), Vietnam. Results will be disseminated through academic journals and conference presentations., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12617000442303., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Globally, an estimated 151 million children under 5 years of age still suffer from the adverse effects of stunting. We sought to develop and externally validate an early life predictive model that could be applied in infancy to accurately predict risk of stunting in preschool children., Methods: We conducted two separate prospective cohort studies in Vietnam that intensively monitored children from early pregnancy until 3 years of age. They included 1168 and 475 live-born infants for model development and validation, respectively. Logistic regression on child stunting at 3 years of age was performed for model development, and the predicted probabilities for stunting were used to evaluate the performance of this model in the validation data set., Results: Stunting prevalence was 16.9% (172 of 1015) in the development data set and 16.4% (70 of 426) in the validation data set. Key predictors included in the final model were paternal and maternal height, maternal weekly weight gain during pregnancy, infant sex, gestational age at birth, and infant weight and length at 6 months of age. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in the validation data set was 0.85 (95% Confidence Interval, 0.80-0.90)., Conclusion: This tool applied to infants at 6 months of age provided valid prediction of risk of stunting at 3 years of age using a readily available set of parental and infant measures. Further research is required to examine the impact of preventive measures introduced at 6 months of age on those identified as being at risk of growth faltering at 3 years of age., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Optimal early childhood development is an international priority. Risks during pregnancy and early childhood have lasting effects because growth is rapid. We will test whether a complex intervention addressing multiple modifiable risks: maternal nutrition, mental health, parenting capabilities, infant health and development and gender-based violence, is effective in reducing deficient cognitive development among children aged two in rural Vietnam., Methods and Analysis: The Learning Clubs intervention is a structured programme combining perinatal stage-specific information, learning activities and social support. It comprises 20 modules, in 19 accessible, facilitated groups for women at a community centre and one home visit. Evidence-informed content is from interventions to address each risk tested in randomised controlled trials in other resource-constrained settings. Content has been translated and culturally adapted for Vietnam and acceptability and feasibility established in pilot testing.We will conduct a two-arm parallel-group cluster-randomised controlled trial, with the commune as clustering unit. An independent statistician will select 84/112 communes in Ha Nam Province and randomly assign 42 to the control arm providing usual care and 42 to the intervention arm. In total, 1008 pregnant women (12 per commune) from 84 clusters are needed to detect a difference in the primary outcome (Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development Cognitive Score <1 SD below standardised norm for 2 years of age) of 15% in the control and 8% in the intervention arms, with 80% power, significance 0.05 and intracluster correlation coefficient 0.03., Ethics and Dissemination: Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (Certificate Number 20160683), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia and the Institutional Review Board of the Hanoi School of Public Health (Certificate Number 017-377IDD- YTCC), Hanoi, Vietnam have approved the trial. Results will be disseminated through a comprehensive multistranded dissemination strategy including peer-reviewed publications, national and international conference presentations, seminars and technical and lay language reports., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12617000442303; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Introduction: Anaemia is a major global health problem affecting about 43% of preschool children globally and 60% of 6-24-month-old children in rural Bangladesh, half of which is attributed to iron deficiency (ID). Although WHO recommends universal supplementation with iron or home fortification with iron-containing multiple micronutrient powders (MMPs) to children under 2 years, evidence for benefits of these interventions on childhood development (a key rationale for these interventions) and harms (especially infection) remains limited. This study aims to evaluate the impact of iron or MMPs supplementation compared with placebo on (a) children's development, (b) growth, (c) morbidity from infections and (d) haematological and iron indices., Methods and Analysis: This study is a three-arm, blinded, double-dummy, parallel-group, placebo-controlled superiority trial using stratified individual block randomisation. The trial will randomise 3300 children aged 8-9 months equally to arm 1: iron syrup (12.5 mg elemental iron), placebo MMPs; arm 2: MMPs (including 12.5 mg elemental iron), placebo syrup; and arm 3: placebo syrup, placebo MNPs. Children will receive interventions for 3 months based on WHO recommendations and then be followed up for 9 months post intervention. The primary outcome is cognitive composite score measured by Bayley III. Secondary outcomes include motor and language composite score by Bayley III, behaviour rating using selected items from Wolke's rating scales and BSID-II behaviour ratings, temperament, growth, haemoglobin, anaemia and iron status, and infectious morbidity. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, at the end of 3-month intervention and after 9 months postintervention follow-up., Ethics and Dissemination: The trial has been approved by the Ethical Review Committee of icddr,b (Dhaka, Bangladesh) and the Melbourne Health Human Research Ethics Committee (Melbourne, Australia). Results of the study will be disseminated through scientific publications, presentations at international meetings and policy briefs to key stakeholders., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12617000660381;Pre-results., Who Universal Trial Number: U1111-1196-1125., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Introduction: Intermittent iron-folic acid supplementation (IFA) is currently recommended for pregnant women in populations where anaemia prevalence among pregnant women is <20% or if daily iron is not acceptable. The effect of providing lower doses of antenatal elemental iron through intermittent regimes on longer-term health outcomes in childhood is unclear., Methods: A prospective cohort study conducted between May 2012 and May 2014 in Viet Nam among children of 36 months of age, born to women previously enrolled in a cluster randomised controlled trial of antenatal micronutrient supplementation (daily IFA (60 mg elemental iron) vs twice-weekly IFA (60 mg elemental iron) vs twice-weekly multiple micronutrient (MMN) supplementation (60 mg elemental iron)). Primary outcomes were height-for-age z-scores (HAZ), according to WHO growth standards and cognitive composite scores (Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, third edition) at 36 months of age., Results: A total of 1017 children born to mothers enrolled in the cluster randomised trial were assessed at 36 months of age. Adjusted mean differences (MDs) in HAZ were -0.14 (95% CI -0.28 to -0.01) and -0.15 (95% CI -0.29 to -0.01) in children born to mothers who received twice-weekly IFA or MMN compared with those who received daily IFA. Children born to mothers who received twice-weekly MMN had lower composite motor scores compared with those who received daily IFA (MD -2.07, 95% CI -4.11 to -0.03). There were no differences in composite cognitive scores in the twice-weekly compared with daily regimens., Conclusions: Low-dose antenatal IFA supplementation (120 mg elemental iron per week) resulted in lower HAZ and motor composite scores in children compared with higher-dose antenatal IFA supplementation (420 mg elemental iron per week). This highlights the importance of adequate iron stores during pregnancy and the need for careful monitoring when lower-dose antenatal iron regimens are used., Trial Registration Number: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: 12610000944033., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SH is funded by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Early Career Fellowship 1112581. JAS is funded by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Senior Research Fellowship 1104975.

Introduction: The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control is developing evidence-based guidance for voluntary screening, treatment and vaccine prevention of infectious diseases for newly arriving migrants to the European Union/European Economic Area. The objective of this systematic review protocol is to guide the identification, appraisal and synthesis of the best available evidence on prevention and assessment of the following priority infectious diseases: tuberculosis, HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis (polio), Haemophilus influenza disease, strongyloidiasis and schistosomiasis., Methods and Analysis: The search strategy will identify evidence from existing systematic reviews and then update the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence using prospective trials, economic evaluations and/or recently published systematic reviews. Interdisciplinary teams have designed logic models to help define study inclusion and exclusion criteria, guiding the search strategy and identifying relevant outcomes. We will assess the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach., Ethics and Dissemination: There are no ethical or safety issues. We anticipate disseminating the findings through open-access publications, conference abstracts and presentations. We plan to publish technical syntheses as GRADEpro evidence summaries and the systematic reviews as part of a special edition open-access publication on refugee health. We are following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols reporting guideline. This protocol is registered in PROSPERO: CRD42016045798., Competing Interests: Competing interests: KP led the Canadian Migrant Health Guidelines. WS led the CDC refugee health guidelines. B-AB was the coleader of the Australasian refugee health guidelines. MP reports an institutional grant (unrestricted) for a project related to blood-borne virus testing from Gilead Sciences outside the submitted work., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)