Reliability of anthropometric measurements of a digi‐board in comparison to an analog height board in Namibian children under 5 years

Author:

Namene Johanna1ORCID,Hunter Christian J.2,Hodgson Shirley34,Hodgson Humphrey45,Misihairabgwi Jane1,Huang Shan67,Conkle Joel8

Affiliation:

1. School of Medicine University of Namibia Windhoek Namibia

2. Clinical Care, Education and Research, Centre of Global Health Practice and Impact Georgetown University Washington District of Columbia USA

3. Department of Clinical Genetics St. George's University of London London UK

4. United Kingdom Charity Nutritional Education and Research for Namibia London UK

5. Institute of Liver and Digestive Health, Division of Medicine University College London London UK

6. Maternal, Child and Adolescent Health Program, Burnet Institute Melbourne Victoria Australia

7. Department of Public Health and Preventative Medicine Monash University Melbourne Australia

8. UNICEF Division of Data, Analytics, Planning and Monitoring New York New York USA

Abstract

AbstractPoor measurement quality has set back the utility of anthropometry in defining childhood malnutrition, prompting calls for alternative measurement techniques. This study aimed to assess the reliability of anthropometric measurements using a digital height board in comparison to an analog height board in Namibian children under 5 years of age. A cross‐sectional, descriptive study was conducted (n = 425) between the age of 6 and 59 months, using anthropometric measurements of weight, height and mid‐upper arm circumference. Two trained enumerators each collected four height measurements of each child: two using an analog height board and two using a digi‐board. The repeated height measurements between and within the enumerators were used to determine intra‐ and interobserver reliability. Reliability of the digi‐board was assessed using the technical error of measurement (TEM), relative TEM (%TEM), intraclass correlation and a Bland–Altman analysis to assess the agreement between the two methods. In all these assessments, the analog height board was considered as the gold standard and used for comparison. The digi‐board showed superiority to the analog height board in terms of reliability (analog TEM = 0.22, digi‐board TEM = 0.16). Although the digi‐board has potential to improve child anthropometry, further clinical and large survey studies are needed to validate the used of this tool in routine population‐based surveys.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3