Gut Microbiome-Targeted Nutrition Interventions and Growth among Children in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
| dc.contributor.author | Addae, Hammond Yaw | |
| dc.contributor.author | Apprey, Charles | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kwarteng, Alexander | |
| dc.contributor.orcid | 0000-0002-0174-6862 | |
| dc.contributor.orcid | 0000-0002-4071-5049 | |
| dc.contributor.orcid | 0000-0002-0893-2908 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-06-03T10:53:20Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-06-03T10:53:20Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-03 | |
| dc.description | This is an article published in Current Developments in Nutrition, Volume 8, Issue 3, March 2024, 102085 ; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.102085 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Background: Childhood malnutrition is a public health challenge of much interest and concern globally. However, a perturbed gut microbiome (GM) may limit some nutrition interventions’ effects among healthy children with undernutrition. Objectives: This review aimed to evaluate the effects of GM-targeted nutrition interventions on growth outcomes among children (0–59 mo) using published studies in low- and middle-income countries. Methods: The methods were guided by the Cochrane methodology. The literature search was conducted to include articles published from inception to July 2023 in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Databases. We identified and included 35 studies among 11,047 children. The analysis was conducted considering various growth parameters in the qualitative synthesis and weight gain (kg) in the meta-analysis. Results: In the qualitative synthesis, 55.6% of prebiotics, 66.7% of probiotics, 71.4% of synbiotics, and 28.6% of “microbiome complementary feed” studies had significant effects on growth outcomes. Also, prebiotics had more studies with significant effects among healthy children, whereas probiotics, synbiotics, and “microbiome complementary feeds” had more studies with significant effects among children with undernutrition. Nineteen studies were included in the meta-analyses, of which 7 (36.8%) measured GM outcomes. The meta-analysis showed that prebiotics exhibited heterogeneity but had significant effects on weight in the intervention as compared with the control (mean difference [MD]: 0.14 kg; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.25; I2 ¼ 63%, P ¼ 0.02; 4 studies, n ¼ 932). Probiotics had significant effects on weight in the intervention (MD: 0.15 kg; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.25; I2 ¼ 42%, P ¼ 0.05; 8 studies, n ¼ 2437) as compared to the control. However, synbiotics (MD: 0.26 kg; 95% CI: –0.04, 0.56; I2 ¼ 41%, P ¼ 0.17; 4 studies, n ¼ 1896] and “microbiome complementary feed” (MD: –0.03 kg; 95% CI: –0.18, 0.11; I2 ¼ 0%, P ¼ 0.60; 3 studies, n ¼ 733] had no significant effects on weight in the intervention as compared with control. Conclusions: Although probiotics and synbiotics may be effective at enhancing growth among children, the selection of interventions should be contingent upon health status | |
| dc.description.sponsorship | KNUST | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Current Developments in Nutrition, Volume 8, Issue 3, March 2024, 102085 ; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.102085 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.102085 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.knust.edu.gh/handle/123456789/15746 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher | Current Developments in Nutrition | |
| dc.title | Gut Microbiome-Targeted Nutrition Interventions and Growth among Children in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | |
| dc.type | Article |