Evaluating the Relative Effectiveness of Two Feeding Interventions for the Treatment of Moderate … (NCT01097889) | Clinical Trial Compass
CompletedNot Applicable
Evaluating the Relative Effectiveness of Two Feeding Interventions for the Treatment of Moderate Acute Malnutrition
Canada, Ethiopia2,600 participantsStarted 2009-04
Plain-language summary
Supplementary feeding programs for children with moderate acute malnutrition have been implemented in developing countries using treatment foods with minimal or no evidence of their effectiveness. Fortified peanut paste is a popular new treatment food for children with severe and moderate malnutrition.
Objectives: To investigate the relative effectiveness of two non-identical therapeutic foods in children with moderate malnutrition by comparing differences in performance indicators (i.e. recovery rates), recovery times, and change in weight-for-height z-scores in each group.
This proposed research project will evaluate the relative effectiveness of two non-identical treatment foods for the treatment of moderate acute malnutrition in children
Who can participate
Age range
6 Months – 60 Months
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion Criteria:
* All children 6 to 60 months of age who are identified as malnourished based on MUAC measurements with WFH ≥70 to \<80%.
Exclusion Criteria:
* Children with WFH \< 70% or presenting with bilateral pitting oedema (they will be referred to therapeutic feeding programme).
* Children with any illness or clinical condition that prevents them from safely ingesting either supplementary foods. A child is medically assessed upon admission for any complicated clinical condition (oedema, malaria, vomiting, chronic diarrhea, infections, appetite, etc) that would require medical care and those children will be referred to the therapeutic feeding programme.
* All children transferred from the therapeutic feeding programme directly into the supplementary feeding programme - however they will not be included in the research study.
* Children with WFH \> 80% but MUAC 110 to 120 mm- they will be admitted to SFP however will not be included in the research study.
Questions worth asking your doctor
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
Questions for the trial coordinator
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.