↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Vitamin A supplementation for preventing morbidity and mortality in children from six months to five years of age

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
256 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
671 Mendeley
Title
Vitamin A supplementation for preventing morbidity and mortality in children from six months to five years of age
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008524.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aamer Imdad, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Kurt Herzer, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Abstract

Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is a major public health problem in low- and middle-income countries, affecting 190 million children under five years of age and leading to many adverse health consequences, including death. Based on prior evidence and a previous version of this review, the World Health Organization has continued to recommend vitamin A supplementation for children aged 6 to 59 months. There are new data available from recently published randomised trials since the previous publication of this review in 2010, and this update incorporates this information and reviews the evidence. To assess the effects of vitamin A supplementation (VAS) for preventing morbidity and mortality in children aged six months to five years. In March 2016 we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases, and two trials registers. We also checked reference lists and contacted relevant organisations and researchers to identify additional studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs evaluating the effect of synthetic VAS in children aged six months to five years living in the community. We excluded studies involving children in hospital and children with disease or infection. We also excluded studies evaluating the effects of food fortification, consumption of vitamin A rich foods, or beta-carotene supplementation. For this update, two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and abstracted data, resolving discrepancies by discussion. We performed meta-analyses for outcomes, including all-cause and cause-specific mortality, disease, vision, and side effects. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. We identified 47 studies (4 of which are new to this review), involving approximately 1,223,856 children. Studies took place in 19 countries: 30 (63%) in Asia, 16 of these in India; 8 (17%) in Africa; 7 (15%) in Latin America, and 2 (4%) in Australia. About one-third of the studies were in urban/periurban settings, and half were in rural settings; the remaining studies did not clearly report settings. Most of the studies included equal numbers of girls and boys and lasted about a year. The included studies were at variable overall risk of bias; however, evidence for the primary outcome was at low risk of bias. A meta-analysis for all-cause mortality included 19 trials (1,202,382 children). At longest follow-up, there was a 12% observed reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality for vitamin A compared with control using a fixed-effect model (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 0.93; high-quality evidence). This result was sensitive to choice of model, and a random-effects meta-analysis showed a different summary estimate (24% reduction: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88); however, the confidence intervals overlapped with that of the fixed-effect model. Nine trials reported mortality due to diarrhoea and showed a 12% overall reduction for VAS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98; 1,098,538 participants; high-quality evidence). There was no significant effect for VAS on mortality due to measles, respiratory disease, and meningitis. VAS reduced incidence of diarrhoea (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.87; 15 studies; 77,946 participants; low-quality evidence) and measles (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.67; 6 studies; 19,566 participants; moderate-quality evidence). However, there was no significant effect on incidence of respiratory disease or hospitalisations due to diarrhoea or pneumonia. There was an increased risk of vomiting within the first 48 hours of VAS (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.69; 4 studies; 10,541 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Vitamin A supplementation is associated with a clinically meaningful reduction in morbidity and mortality in children. Therefore, we suggest maintaining the policy of universal supplementation for children under five years of age in populations at risk of VAD. Further placebo-controlled trials of VAS in children between six months and five years of age would not change the conclusions of this review, although studies that compare different doses and delivery mechanisms are needed. In populations with documented vitamin A deficiency, it would be unethical to conduct placebo-controlled trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 147 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 671 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 669 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 114 17%
Student > Bachelor 80 12%
Researcher 63 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 8%
Other 33 5%
Other 99 15%
Unknown 231 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 143 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 93 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 6%
Social Sciences 28 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 3%
Other 86 13%
Unknown 258 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 145. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 March 2024.
All research outputs
#287,635
of 25,634,695 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#479
of 13,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,036
of 321,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#18
of 284 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,634,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,152 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 284 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.