No abstract

Purpose A lack of data, intervention studies, policies, and targets for nutrition in school-age children (SAC) and adolescents (5-19 years) is hampering progress towards tackling malnutrition. To stimulate and guide further research, this study generated a list of research priorities. Methods Using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method, a list of 48 research questions was compiled and questions were scored against defined criteria using a stakeholder survey. Questions covered all forms of malnutrition, including micronutrient deficiencies, thinness, stunting, overweight/obesity, and suboptimal dietary quality. The context was defined as research focused on SAC and adolescents, 5 to 19 years old, in low-and middle-income countries, that could achieve measurable results in reducing the prevalence of malnutrition in the next 10 years. Results Between 85 and 101 stakeholders responded per question. Respondents covered a broad geographical distribution across 38 countries, with the largest proportion focusing on work in East and Southern Africa. Of the research questions ranked in the top ten, half focused on delivery strategies for reaching adolescents and half on improving existing interventions. There were few differences in the ranked order of questions between age groups but those related to in-school children and adolescents had higher expert agreement than those for out-of-school adolescents. The top ranked research question focused on tailoring antenatal and postnatal care for pregnant adolescent girls. Conclusion Nutrition programmes should incorporate implementation research to inform delivery of effective interventions to this age group, starting in schools. Academic research on the development and tailoring of existing nutrition interventions is also needed; specifically, on how to package multisectoral programmes and how to better reach vulnerable and underserved sub- groups, including those out of school.

The World Food Programme (WFP) remains committed to exploring new modalities to improve early detection and treatment coverage for moderate acute malnutrition (MAM) and severe acute malnutrition (SAM) and, more importantly, to prevent malnutrition altogether. The article contains various wrong assertions about WFP nutrition programming. First, WFP Nigeria has not experienced any budget reduction for MAM treatment in recent years. Equally, WFP South Sudan does not have restrictions to subcontract monitoring. Incidentally, ready-to-use supplementary food (RUSF) is not the only food supplement utilised by WFP for treating MAM children. RUSF and Super Cereal Plus are used in Niger, Nigeria and South Sudan. Similarly, in Nigeria, where targeted supplementary feeding programmes (TSFP) are not included in the national protocol, WFP has been treating MAM children using RUSF and Super Cereal Plus through blanket supplementary feeding programme (BSFP) platforms since 2017 in conflict affected areas. This article analyses the perspectives of stakeholders interviewed by the authors, affiliated with IRC, about the Combined Protocol which utilises ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF). Availability of RUSF was used as a proxy indicator of RUSF pipeline reliability. However, the use of Super Cereal Plus for MAM children and the provision of MAM treatment through BSFP, both related to RUSF availability, were overlooked. To assess RUSF and RUTF pipeline reliability, considering the increased caseload resulting from treating SAM and MAM with one product, the authors should have examined supply chain elements such as last mile delivery and volume, since worldwide MAM children outnumber by far SAM children.