# Methodological quality and reporting characteristics of anthropometric measurements in studies assessing the nutritional status of children in Ethiopia: A scoping review

## TL;DR

This review examines how well studies in Ethiopia report methods for measuring children's nutrition, finding gaps in reporting quality.

## Contribution

The study identifies inconsistencies in reporting anthropometric methods in Ethiopian child nutrition studies and suggests improving the STROBE-nut guidelines.

## Key findings

- Most studies did not report standardization or calibration of measurement tools.
- Over half of the studies excluded children based on specific criteria like anti-parasitic treatment.
- Many studies failed to mention the setting where measurements were taken.

## Abstract

Accurate anthropometric data is essential for assessing nutritional status. To ensure data quality, careful planning of instruments, training and supervision of enumerators are mandatory. In Ethiopia, where malnutrition rates are high, investigating the methodological quality of anthropometric measurements in primary studies is crucial for ensuring the credibility of reports. Therefore, this review assesses the reporting characteristics and methodological quality of anthropometric measurements in primary studies conducted in Ethiopia, focusing on the nutritional status of school children.

A comprehensive systematic search was conducted to include primary studies that reported on children’s growth from Medline, AJOL, Embase, and CINAHL. Additional sources, such as Google Scholar, ProQuest, Addis Ababa, and Jimma University’s repositories were also accessed. Studies whose primary objective was to evaluate the nutritional status of children using anthropometric measurements were included in the review. The results were organized in EndNote, screened in Covidence, extracted in Excel and analyzed in Stata.

Of the 678 retrieved records, 30 (n = 18,059) studies were included in the review. The studies used different exclusion criteria: 14 (46.7%) excluded children with physical deformities, seven (23.3%) excluded children who received anti-parasitic treatment within a specified time and four (13.3%) excluded children who were taking nutritional supplements. About 22 (73.3%) studies did not mention standardization, while 17 (56.7%) did not mention the calibration of instruments. Furthermore, about 12 (40%) studies did not report the setting where the measurements were obtained.

Inconsistencies in reporting key methodological details of anthropometric measurements were identified, highlighting a potential gap or loose interpretations of the STROBE-nut reporting checklist for studies that measure anthropometry to assess the nutritional status of children. Therefore, we recommend strengthening the STROBE-nut by giving emphasis to the quality assurance aspect of anthropometric measurements including standardization, calibration, material, setting, number of measurements taken and measurer qualifications.