Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment of trials on complementary food with or without education

From: Impact of education and provision of complementary feeding on growth and morbidity in children less than 2 years of age in developing countries: a systematic review

  Quality Assessment Summary of Findings
  Directness No of events  
No of studies Design Limitations Consistency Generalizability to population of interest Generalizability to intervention of interest Intervention Control RR or SMD (95% CI)
Height gain: Moderate outcome-specific quality
4 studies[17, 2426] RCT Random effect model was used because of heterogeneity 2 studies suggest benefit To food insecure population   257 255 SMD 0.34(-0.09, 0.78)
Food insecure population
Height for age: Moderate outcome-specific quality
7 studies[17, 22, 2426, 29, 30] RCT +non RCT Random effect model was used because of heterogeneity 2 studies suggest benefit To food insecure population   704 948 SMD 0.39 (0.05, 0.73)
Food insecure population
Stunting: Moderate outcome-specific quality
7 studies[17, 22, 2426, 29, 30] RCT +non RCT Random effect model was used because of heterogeneity   To food insecure population   704 948 RR 0.33 (0.11, 1.00)
Food insecure population
Weight gain: Moderate outcome-specific quality
4 studies[17, 2426] RCT Random effect model was used because of heterogeneity 1 study suggest benefit To food insecure population   247 255 SMD 0.43 (-0.42, 1.27)
Food insecure population
Weight-for-age: Moderate outcome-specific quality
3 studies[22, 25, 30] RCT+ non RCTs Random effect model was used because of heterogeneity 1 study suggest benefit To food insecure population   162 156 SMD 0.26 (0.04, 0.48)
Food insecure population
Underweight: Moderate outcome-specific quality
1 study[30] Non RCT    Only one study and to food insecure population   170 149 RR 0.35 (0.16, 0.77)
Food insecure population