Association between nutritional status and dengue infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Infectious Diseases

Table 1 Meta-analysis of the association between nutritional status and the severity of dengue. Pooled odds ratios (OR) with corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) of the published results were calculated where more than one study had investigated the factor

Variable	No. of study	Total sample size (DSS/DHF)	Heterogeneity		Model	Association with severity			Egger’s 2-tailed bias p-value
Variable	No. of study	Total sample size (DSS/DHF)	p-value	I ²	Model	p-value	Odds ratio (95 % CI)	p-value after removing 1 study	Egger’s 2-tailed bias p-value
Malnutrition (DSS vs. DHF) All methods	10	1741/3497	0 · 32	13	Fixed	0 · 072	1.17(0.99–1.39)		0.01
							1.27(1.09–1.49)^a		0.01
Malnutrition (DSS vs. DHF)	7	1398/3010	0 · 43	0	Fixed	0.031	1.25(1.02–1.53)		0.04
Weight for age	7	1398/3010	0 · 43	0	Fixed	0.031	1.40(1.16–1.69)^a		0.04
Malnutrition (DSS + DHF vs. DF)	3	3897/894	0 · 89	0	Fixed	0.028	0.77(0.61–0.97)
Malnutrition (DHFvs.DF)	5	2745/1006	0 · 38	4	Fixed	0.005	0.71(0.56–0.90)	0.84	0.12
Malnutrition (Combined dengue vs. healthy) (weight for age)	3	473/791	0.20	39	Fixed	<0.001	:0 · 46(0 · 30–0 · 70)
Malnutrition (DSS + DHF vs. healthy) (weight for age)	2	345/717	0.17	47	Fixed	<0.001	:0 · 44(0 · 29–0 · 67)
Normal nutrition (DSS vs. DHF) All methods	9	1616/3398	0 · 26	21	Fixed	0 · 03	0 · 87(0 · 77–0 · 99)	0 · 20	0 · 43
Obesity/overweight (DSS vs. DHF) All methods	8	1513/3187	0 · 05	51	Random	0 · 15	1 · 31(0 · 91–1 · 88)		0 · 32

^aOR: adjusted odds ratio calculated after the addition of potential missing studies using the trim and fill method of Duvall and Tweedie

ISSN: 1471-2334