Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42063609›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of public health2026

Effectiveness of Nutrition-Specific Interventions for Reducing Child Stunting: A Systematic Review of Evidence.

Eman Salim Ahmed Salim, Veni Hadju

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eman Salim Ahmed SalimDepartment of Immunology, The National Ribat University, Khartoum, Sudan.
Veni HadjuDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Faculty of Public Health, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of nutrition-specific interventions in improving child linear growth and reducing stunting during the first 1,000 days of life. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published up to September 2025. Randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized trials, cohort, and quasi-experimental studies assessing nutrition-specific interventions were included. Due to substantial heterogeneity across studies, findings were synthesized narratively. Results: Thirteen studies conducted in Asia, Africa, and Latin America were included. Nutrition-specific interventions, particularly lipid-based nutrient supplements, fortified foods, and food-based strategies, were associated with modest improvements in length-for-age z-scores and reductions in stunting prevalence. Larger effects were observed when interventions were initiated early in life and implemented in settings with high baseline stunting and food insecurity. Conclusion: Nutrition-specific interventions can contribute to improvements in child linear growth, especially when delivered early and sustained during the first 1,000 days. However, effect sizes vary by context, underscoring the importance of integrated and context-sensitive implementation strategies.

Indexed as

Growth DisordersDietary SupplementsEvidence GapsFood, FortifiedHumansInfantMicronutrientsNutritional StatusMicronutrientschild growthLNSmaternal nutritionmicronutrientsnutrition-specific intervention

Identifiers

PMID42063609
PMCPMC13126305

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.