2002
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601456
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anthropometric assessment of nutritional status in adolescent populations in humanitarian emergencies

Abstract: Objective: To outline the difficulties and suggest potential solutions in anthropometric assessment of adolescents during humanitarian emergencies. Design: Literature review. Setting: Multiple settings in which the nutritional status of adolescents has been assessed using anthropometric measurements. Subjects: Adolescents in multiple populations. Interventions: None. Results: The use of anthropometry may be more difficult in adolescents than in other age groups because anthropometric indices in normally nouris… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
51
0
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
2
51
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The present study supports the plea to develop improved references for the assessment of the nutritional status of adolescents in developing countries (Woodruff and Duffield, 2002). The WHO's references have been criticised because of the risk of misclassification of individuals, which can be translated as a combination of over consumption of health resources by individuals at lower health risk and under consumption by those most at risk (Neovius et al, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 65%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The present study supports the plea to develop improved references for the assessment of the nutritional status of adolescents in developing countries (Woodruff and Duffield, 2002). The WHO's references have been criticised because of the risk of misclassification of individuals, which can be translated as a combination of over consumption of health resources by individuals at lower health risk and under consumption by those most at risk (Neovius et al, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…This value triples the reported prevalence of stunting in women of 15-19 y who had had a child in the previous 3 y (INE, 1998); however, applying to our data the single cutoff point of 145 cm for height that is regularly used by the Bolivian National Institute of Statistics, this value is reduced to 3.4% and becomes three times lower than the reported one. These discrepancies support the need to develop further references that may be of more pertinence for adolescents in developing countries (Woodruff and Duffield, 2002;Neovius et al, 2004). The present study found that 4% more boys can be considered as thin when compared with girls.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Anthropometric measurements were converted to heightfor-age and BMI-for-age z scores and percentiles. Girls with height-for-age below -2Z scores and BMI-for-age below the 5 th percentile of the 2007 WHO reference population were classified as stunted and undernourished, respectively (12,13,14). Girls with height-for-age z scores (HAZ) < -6 or > 6 were considered outliers.…”
Section: Anthropometrymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While direct observation can be used as an alternative to proxy reports of those eating from a common pot (Gittelsohn, Shankar, Pokhrel, & West, 1994), direct observation, like proxy reports, may not provide an accurate assessment of dietary intake for adolescents who typically take more of their meals outside the household. Finally, the use of anthropometric measures to identify adolescent food insecurity resulting from intrahousehold discrimination is hampered by the lack of an agreed upon reference population and the need for sensitive information on maturational stage (Woodruff & Duffield, 2002). Indeed, in a review of eleven studies of nutritional status of adolescence in developing countries, the authors concluded that "nutritional [anthropometric] measures alone should not be used as indicators of wellbeing" (Kurz & Johnson-Welch, 1994:25).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%