BackgroundWasting and stunting are global public health problems that frequently co-exist. However, they are usually separated in terms of policy, guidance, programming and financing. Though both wasting and stunting are manifestations of undernutrition caused by disease and poor diet, there are critical gaps in our understanding of the physiological relationship between them, and how interventions for one may affect the other. The aim of this exercise was to establish research priorities in the relationships between wasting and stunting to guide future research investments.Methods and FindingsWe used the CHNRI (Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative) methodology for setting research priorities in health. We utilised a group of experts in nutrition, growth and child health to prioritise 30 research questions against three criteria (answerability, usefulness and impact) using an online survey. Eighteen of 25 (72%) experts took part and prioritised research directly related to programming, particularly at the public health level. The highest-rated questions were: “Can interventions outside of the 1000 days, e.g. pre-school, school age and adolescence, lead to catch-up in height and in other developmental markers?”; “What timely interventions work to mitigate seasonal peaks in both wasting and stunting?”; and “What is the optimal formulation of ready-to-use foods to promote optimal ponderal growth and also support linear growth during and after recovery from severe acute malnutrition?” There was a high level of agreement between experts, particularly for the highest ranking questions.ConclusionsIncreased commitment to rigorous evaluations of treatment and prevention interventions at the public health level, addressing questions of the timing of intervention, and the extent to which impacts for both wasting and stunting can be achieved, is needed to inform global efforts to tackle undernutrition and its consequences.

By engaging expert opinion, Marko Kerac and colleagues set research priorities for the management of acute malnutrition in infants.

PurposeChildren living with disabilities are at high risk of malnutrition but have long been marginalised in malnutrition treatment programmes and research. The 2013 WHO guidelines for severe acute malnutrition (SAM) mention disability but do not contain specific details for treatment or support. This study assesses inclusion of children living with disabilities in national and international SAM guidelines.MethodsNational and international SAM guidelines available in English, French, Spanish or Portuguese were sourced online and via direct enquiries. Regional guidelines or protocols subspecialising in a certain patient group (eg, people living with HIV) were excluded. Eight scoping key informant interviews were conducted with experts involved in guideline development to help understand possible barriers to formalising malnutrition guidance for children living with disabilities.Results71 malnutrition guidelines were reviewed (63 national, 8 international). National guidelines obtained covered the greater part of countries with a high burden of malnutrition. 85% of guidelines (60/71) mention disability, although mostly briefly. Only 4% (3/71) had a specific section for children living with disabilities, while the remaining lacked guidance on consistently including them in programmes or practice. Only one guideline mentioned strategies to include children living with disabilities during a nutritional emergency. Most (99%,70/71) did not link to other disability-specific guidelines. Of the guidelines that included children living with disabilities, most only discussed disability in general terms despite the fact that different interventions are often needed for children with different conditions. Interviews pointed towards barriers related to medical complexity, resource constraints, epidemiology (eg, unrecognised burden), lack of evidence and difficulty of integration into existing guidelines.ConclusionChildren living with disabilities are under-recognised in most SAM guidelines. Where they are recognised, recommendations are very limited. Better evidence is urgently needed to identify and manage children living with disabilities in malnutrition programmes. More inclusion in the 2022 update of the WHO malnutrition guidelines could support this vulnerable group.

Background An estimated 49.5 million children under five years of age are wasted. There is a lack of robust studies on effective interventions to prevent wasting. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritise the main outstanding research questions in relation to wasting prevention to inform future research agendas. Method A research prioritisation exercise was conducted following the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method. Identified research gaps were compiled from multiple sources, categorised into themes and streamlined into forty research questions by an expert group. A survey was then widely circulated to assess research questions according to four criteria. An overall research priority score was calculated to rank questions.

Background: Child wasting is highly prevalent, with around 49.5 million children under five years affected globally. More evidence is needed to inform the scale up of effective treatment of wasted children worldwide. The aim of this study was to identify and prioritise the main outstanding research questions relating to the treatment of wasting to inform future research agendas. Methods: A research prioritisation exercise was undertaken using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative method. Research gaps were identified from multiple sources, grouped in themes and condensed into a list of 53 research areas by a group of experts. An online survey was developed and circulated globally to individuals working in the global nutrition sector. Participants evaluated each research area according to four agreed criteria. Research areas were then ranked according to an overall research priority score. Results: A total of 394 individuals from 63 countries participated in the survey. Research areas prioritised by the group focused on the effective detection and diagnosis of ‘high risk’ wasted children in the community; provision of a continuum of care; and early life course interventions. The group also prioritised evidence to inform guidance on the impatient management of wasted children with diarrhoea; prevention of post-treatment relapse and mortality; and the optimisation of ready-to-use therapeutic foods in treatment programmes. Conclusions: Critical gaps in our understanding of the treatment of wasting must be filled to inform guidance, policy and programming to ensure that all wasted children receive the treatment services that they need. A coordinated research agenda across treatment and prevention is urgently needed to maximise the impact of funding investments towards the meeting of global targets to reduce child wasting.