Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Related content

Jump to:

Related reviews and protocols

Topics

Topics

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 1 Weight gain kg.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 1 Weight gain kg.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 2 Height gain (cm).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 2 Height gain (cm).

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 3 Weight for age: z‐scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 3 Weight for age: z‐scores.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 4 Height for age: z‐scores.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 4 Height for age: z‐scores.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 14 MUAC.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 14 MUAC.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 21 Mid‐upper arm muscle area.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.21

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 21 Mid‐upper arm muscle area.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 22 Mid upper arm fat area.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.22

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 22 Mid upper arm fat area.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 23 weight for height gain.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.23

Comparison 1 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT, Outcome 23 weight for height gain.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 1 Undernourished vs adequately nourished: Weight gain in kg.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 1 Undernourished vs adequately nourished: Weight gain in kg.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 2 Undernourished versus adequately nourished, height in cm.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 2 Undernourished versus adequately nourished, height in cm.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 3 Age subgroup analysis: weight gain in kg.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 3 Age subgroup analysis: weight gain in kg.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 4 Age subgroup analysis: height gain (cm).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control, Outcome 4 Age subgroup analysis: height gain (cm).

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 1 Weight gain kg‐ adjusted ICC 0.025.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 1 Weight gain kg‐ adjusted ICC 0.025.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 2 Math change overall icc .15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 2 Math change overall icc .15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 3 Math change by nutritional status, icc 0.15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 3 Math change by nutritional status, icc 0.15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 5 Height gain (cm)‐ adjusted ICC =0.016.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 5 Height gain (cm)‐ adjusted ICC =0.016.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 9 subgroup analysis weight by sex.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.9

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 9 subgroup analysis weight by sex.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 10 Subgroup analysis: height by sex.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.10

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 10 Subgroup analysis: height by sex.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 11 Subgroup by age: weight gain in kg ‐ Agarwal adjusted.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.11

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 11 Subgroup by age: weight gain in kg ‐ Agarwal adjusted.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 12 Subgroup by age: height gain in cm ‐ Agarwal adjusted.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.12

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 12 Subgroup by age: height gain in cm ‐ Agarwal adjusted.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 13 Full scale IQ (total): adjusted‐ICC 0.15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.13

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 13 Full scale IQ (total): adjusted‐ICC 0.15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 21 Full scale IQ (separated): cluster size as in analysis: icc = .15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.21

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 21 Full scale IQ (separated): cluster size as in analysis: icc = .15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 24 Performance IQ (separated): numbers as in analysis: ICC = 0.15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.24

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 24 Performance IQ (separated): numbers as in analysis: ICC = 0.15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 26 Performance IQ (total): adjusted‐ICC 0.15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.26

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 26 Performance IQ (total): adjusted‐ICC 0.15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 28 Verbal IQ (separated): cluster size as in analysis: ICC= 0.15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.28

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 28 Verbal IQ (separated): cluster size as in analysis: ICC= 0.15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 29 Verbal IQ (total): adjusted‐ ICC 0.15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.29

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 29 Verbal IQ (total): adjusted‐ ICC 0.15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 36 Percent weight for age: ICC= .025.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.36

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 36 Percent weight for age: ICC= .025.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 40 Percent height for age: ICC= 0.016.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.40

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 40 Percent height for age: ICC= 0.016.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 44 Change in reading: ICC= .15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.44

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 44 Change in reading: ICC= .15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 47 change in spelling: ICC= .15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.47

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 47 change in spelling: ICC= .15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 56 change in attendance: icc = .15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.56

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 56 change in attendance: icc = .15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 57 End of study: attendance: icc = .15.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.57

Comparison 3 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA, Outcome 57 End of study: attendance: icc = .15.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 4 developed country: school meal versus control: CBA, Outcome 2 Weight gain: Corry‐Mann alone.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 developed country: school meal versus control: CBA, Outcome 2 Weight gain: Corry‐Mann alone.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 4 developed country: school meal versus control: CBA, Outcome 7 Height gain in cm. adjusted ICC=0.016.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.7

Comparison 4 developed country: school meal versus control: CBA, Outcome 7 Height gain in cm. adjusted ICC=0.016.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 1 change in height.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 1 change in height.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 2 Subgroup analysis: height by sex.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 2 Subgroup analysis: height by sex.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 3 change in weight (kg).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 3 change in weight (kg).

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 4 Subgroup analysis: weight by sex.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Developed country: School meal vs control RCT, Outcome 4 Subgroup analysis: weight by sex.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 5 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 5 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 6 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 6 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 7 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.7

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 7 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 9 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.9

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 9 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 10 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.10

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 10 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 11 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.11

Comparison 10 Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 11 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 1 Math change overall icc .1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 1 Math change overall icc .1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 2 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 2 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 3 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.3

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 3 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 4 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.4

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 4 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 5 Math change overall icc .2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.5

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 5 Math change overall icc .2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 6 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.6

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 6 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 7 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.7

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 7 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 8 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.8

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 8 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 11 Percent height for age: icc = 0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.11

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 11 Percent height for age: icc = 0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 12 Percent height for age: icc = .1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.12

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 12 Percent height for age: icc = .1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 14 Full scale IQ (total)‐ sensitivity 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.14

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 14 Full scale IQ (total)‐ sensitivity 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 16 Math (change) by nutritional status: cluster size as in analysis Sensitivity ICC=0.2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.16

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 16 Math (change) by nutritional status: cluster size as in analysis Sensitivity ICC=0.2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 17 Math (change) by nutritional status: cluster size as in analysis Sensitivity ICC=0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.17

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 17 Math (change) by nutritional status: cluster size as in analysis Sensitivity ICC=0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 18 Full scale IQ (total)‐ sensitivity 0.20.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.18

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 18 Full scale IQ (total)‐ sensitivity 0.20.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 20 Full scale IQ (end study): sensitivity cluster size as in analysis ICC= 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.20

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 20 Full scale IQ (end study): sensitivity cluster size as in analysis ICC= 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 22 Full scale IQ (end study): sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.22

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 22 Full scale IQ (end study): sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 23 Performance IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC= 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.23

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 23 Performance IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC= 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 25 Performance IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.25

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 25 Performance IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 27 Verbal IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analyses: ICC = 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.27

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 27 Verbal IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analyses: ICC = 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 29 Verbal IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.29

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 29 Verbal IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 30 Percentage standard weight. Sensitivity = 0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.30

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 30 Percentage standard weight. Sensitivity = 0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 32 Percent weight for age: Sensitivity ICC= 0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.32

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 32 Percent weight for age: Sensitivity ICC= 0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 33 Percent weight for age: Sensitivity ICC= 0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.33

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 33 Percent weight for age: Sensitivity ICC= 0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 36 Verbal IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.10.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.36

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 36 Verbal IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.10.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 37 Verbal IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.20.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.37

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 37 Verbal IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.20.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 38 Performance IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.10.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.38

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 38 Performance IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.10.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 39 Percentage standard height. Sensitivity = .01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.39

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 39 Percentage standard height. Sensitivity = .01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 41 Performance IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.20.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.41

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 41 Performance IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.20.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 45 change in reading: sensitivity ICC= .1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.45

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 45 change in reading: sensitivity ICC= .1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 46 change in reading: sensitivity ICC= .2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.46

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 46 change in reading: sensitivity ICC= .2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 50 change in spelling: sensitivity ICC= .1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.50

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 50 change in spelling: sensitivity ICC= .1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 52 change in spelling: sensitivity ICC= 0.2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.52

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 52 change in spelling: sensitivity ICC= 0.2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 58 Change in attendance: sensitivity = .10.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.58

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 58 Change in attendance: sensitivity = .10.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 59 change in attendance: sensitivity = .20.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.59

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 59 change in attendance: sensitivity = .20.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 60 End of study attendance: sensitivity icc = .10.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.60

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 60 End of study attendance: sensitivity icc = .10.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 61 End of study attendance: sensitvity icc at .2.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.61

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 61 End of study attendance: sensitvity icc at .2.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 62 Change in Attendace: Sensitivity = .05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 11.62

Comparison 11 Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 62 Change in Attendace: Sensitivity = .05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 3 Weight gain in kg‐ sensitivity icc=0.01. Leighton 1929 used for Orr.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.3

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 3 Weight gain in kg‐ sensitivity icc=0.01. Leighton 1929 used for Orr.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 4 Weight gain in kg.‐ sensitivity icc=0.05. Leighton used for Orr.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.4

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 4 Weight gain in kg.‐ sensitivity icc=0.05. Leighton used for Orr.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 5 Weight gain in kg. ‐ sensitivity ICC=0.1. Leighton used for Orr.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.5

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 5 Weight gain in kg. ‐ sensitivity ICC=0.1. Leighton used for Orr.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 7 Height gain in cm. adjusted ICC=0.016.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.7

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 7 Height gain in cm. adjusted ICC=0.016.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 8 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.8

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 8 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 9 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.05.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.9

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 9 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.05.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 10 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.1.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.10

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 10 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.1.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 12 Height gain in cm. Leighton used for Orr. Sensitivity 0.01.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.12

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 12 Height gain in cm. Leighton used for Orr. Sensitivity 0.01.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 13 Height gain in cm. Sensitivity ICC = 0.05. Leighton used for Orr.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.13

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 13 Height gain in cm. Sensitivity ICC = 0.05. Leighton used for Orr.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 14 Height gain in cm. Sensitivity ICC = .1. Leighton used for Orr.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 12.14

Comparison 12 Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity, Outcome 14 Height gain in cm. Sensitivity ICC = .1. Leighton used for Orr.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab
Table 1. Table 6: LLMIC: Effect size and significance by various study attributes

Study ID

Date

Type of study

Blinding

Energy

Weight

Height

Attendance

Intelligence

Math

Bailey 1962

1962

CBA

U

9% Low

.21 ns

0.2

Devadas 1979

1979

CBA

U

18‐21%: higher

.95,., .33, .90, sig

2.62, 2.75, 2.65

Powell 1983

1983

CBA

A

18‐21%: higher

2.8 days per semester diff.

Beta = .15

Agarwal 1989

1989

CBA

U

25%: higher

.7 and .8 s

‐.3, .2'

3.92 FS, 5.69 P, 3.3 V

3.7 points per year

Chandler 1995

1995

RCT

A

24%: higher

Jacoby 1996

1996

RCT

U

26%: higher

3.5 % diff. 6 days a year

Powell 1998

1998

rCT

A

32%: higher

.47 a, sig

.17 a ns

2.3% diff. 4 days a year

.71 points per year

Neumann 2003

2003

RCT

A

13%: lower

.28 (N.S)

‐0.37

.17 points per year

Du 2004

2004

RCT

A

10%: lower

1.5

1.20 (S)
Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Table 6: LLMIC: Effect size and significance by various study attributes
Navigate to table in Review
Table 2. Table 7: HIC: Effect size and significance by various study attributes

Study ID

Date

Type of study

Blinding

Energy

Weight

Height

Attendance

Intelligence

Math

Correy‐Mann 1926

1926

CBA

U

19%: higher

1.42 kg

1.98cm

Orr 1928

1928

CBA

U

14‐18%: higher

.05‐.54

0.65

Tisdall 1951

1951

CBA

U

36%: higher

0.32

0.25

n.s.

Lieberman 1976

1976

CBA

U

14%: lower

5 days a year, n.s.

Paige 1976

1976

CBA

U

12%: lower

.09‐.96

.2‐1.0

2.5 days per year, .n.s

Baker 1980

1980

RCT

A

5%: higher

.15 ns

0.22 ns

Bro 1994

1994

ITS

I

Bro 1996

1996

ITS

I

Shemilt 2004

2004

RCT

U
Figures and Tables -
Table 2. Table 7: HIC: Effect size and significance by various study attributes
Navigate to table in Review
Table 3. Quality of included studies

Study

Shape intervention

Baseline measure

Reliable outcome

Contamination?

Blinded assessment

Agarwal

A for all

U for 4

A

U

Bailey

U

U A for hemoglobin

U

U

Baker

A height U weight

U

I

A

Bro 1994

I

n.a.

A

n.a.

I

Bro 1996

A

n.a.

I

n.a.

I

Chandler, 1995

n.a.

A

A

A

Corry‐Mann

A

U

U

U

Devadas, 1979

A

U for weight, height, A for hemoglobin

U

U

Du 2004

A

U for weight, height, A for BMD

U

A

Jacoby 1996

A

A

A

I for attendanceU for psychological

Lieberman, 1976

U

U for all

A

U

Neumann 2003

A

A for weight, height, A for psychological tests, U for hematocrit, hemoglobin

A

A

Orr 1928

U

U

A

U

Paige 1976

A weight, U height

A

A

U

Powell 1983

I for spelling, reading, U for math, A for height for age, weight for age

U

A

A

Powell 1998

A for all 6

A

A

A

Shemilt 2006

U for 3, A for one

A for 3, U for 1

I

U

Tisdall, 1953

U

U

U

U

Totals

7 A for all, 5 U for all, 2 mixed A and U, 1 mixed A and I

5 A for all, 7 u for all, 5 mixed, 1 I

9A 5 U, 2I, 2na

6A, 9U, 2 I, 1mixed
Figures and Tables -
Table 3. Quality of included studies
Navigate to table in Review
Table 4. Absolute and relative differences for subgroup analysis by age: RCTs

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Age group

Outcome

# children, # studies

Control baseline

Control change from baseline

Absolute difference in change

% change relative to baseline

% change relative to rate of change

9‐10 years

Weight (kg)

1226, 2 studies

21.8 kg

1.62 kg

0.42 kg

1.9

26%

Mixed age, 6‐16 years

Weight (kg)

236 children, 1 study

20.4 kg

3.47 kg

0.28 kg

1.4%

8.1%

9‐10 years

Height (cm)

1226 children, 2 studies

123.6 cm

4.29 cm

0.40 cm

0.33%

9.3%

Mixed 6‐16 years

Height (cm)

236 children, 1 study

115.5 cm

10.04 cm

‐0.37 cm

‐0.32%

‐3.7%
Figures and Tables -
Table 4. Absolute and relative differences for subgroup analysis by age: RCTs
Navigate to table in Review
Table 5. Absolute and relative differences for age subgroups: CBAs

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Age group

Outcome

# children, # studies

Control baseline

Control change from baseline

Absolute difference in change

% change relative to control baseline

% change relative to rate of change

5‐6 years

Weight (kg)

106 children, 1 study

15.11 kg

0.97 kg

0.95 kg

6.4%

98%

6‐8 years

Weight (kg)

564 children, 2 studies

18.22 kg

1.64 kg

0.67 kg

3.7%

40.8%

9‐10 years

Weight (kg)

212 children, 1 study

22.72 kg

2.0 kg

0.89 kg

3.9%

44.5%

Mixed ages, 7‐13 years

Weight (kg)

140 children, 1 study

22.9 kg

2.28 kg

0.21 kg

0.9%

0.9%

5‐6 years

Height (cm)

106 children, 1 study

104.69 cm

4.06 cm

2.62 cm

3.9%

65%

6‐8 years

Height (cm)

564 children, 2 studies

116.6 cm

3.8 cm

1.25 cm

1.1%

33%

9‐10 years

Height (cm)

212 children, 1 study

124.1 cm

5.3 cm

‐0.21 cm

‐0.2%

‐4.0%

Mixed ages, 7‐13 years

Height (cm)

140 children, 1 study

123.6 cm

5.24 cm

0.2 cm

0.2%

3.8%
Figures and Tables -
Table 5. Absolute and relative differences for age subgroups: CBAs
Navigate to table in Review
Table 6. Absolute and relative differences for randomized controlled trials

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Outcome

# children, # studies

Baseline (control group)

Absolute change from baseline

Weighted absolute difference in change

% change relative to baseline

% change relative to rate of change

Weight (kg)

1462 children,
3 studies

29.4 kg

2.88 kg

0.39 kg

1.3%

13.5%

Height (cm)

1462 children,
3 studies

134.5 cm

6.34 cm

0.38 cm

0.3%

6%
Figures and Tables -
Table 6. Absolute and relative differences for randomized controlled trials
Navigate to table in Review
Table 7. Absolute and relative differences for controlled before after studies

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Outcome

# children,
# studies

Baseline (control group)

Change from baseline (control group)

Absolute difference in change

Relative % change

% change relative to rate of change

Weight (kg)

991 children,
3 studies

18.22 kg

1.62 kg

0.71 kg

3.9%

44%

Height (cm)

988 children,
3 studies

116.6 cm

4.33 cm

1.45 cm

1.2%

33%
Figures and Tables -
Table 7. Absolute and relative differences for controlled before after studies
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 1. Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Weight gain kg Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.39 [0.11, 0.67]

2 Height gain (cm) Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.38 [‐0.32, 1.08]

3 Weight for age: z‐scores Show forest plot

1

785

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.07 [0.04, 0.10]

4 Height for age: z‐scores Show forest plot

2

1021

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.04 [0.02, 0.06]

14 MUAC Show forest plot

1

236

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.31 [0.16, 0.46]

21 Mid‐upper arm muscle area Show forest plot

1

236

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

68.22 [39.57, 96.87]

22 Mid upper arm fat area Show forest plot

1

236

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.31 [‐26.12, 25.50]

23 weight for height gain Show forest plot

1

236

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.2 [‐0.24, 0.64]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 2. Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Undernourished vs adequately nourished: Weight gain in kg Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 Undernourished

1

392

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.25 [0.08, 0.42]

1.2 Adequately Nourished

1

393

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.47 [0.16, 0.78]

2 Undernourished versus adequately nourished, height in cm Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Undernourished

1

392

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.30 [0.05, 0.55]

2.2 Adequately nourished

1

393

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.17 [‐0.11, 0.45]

3 Age subgroup analysis: weight gain in kg Show forest plot

4

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 Ages 5‐6 years

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Age 6‐8 years

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 Age 9‐10 years

3

1226

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.42 [0.09, 0.75]

3.4 Age 6‐16 years

1

236

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.28 [‐0.07, 0.63]

4 Age subgroup analysis: height gain (cm) Show forest plot

4

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 Ages 5‐6 years

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 Age 6‐8 years

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 Age 9‐10 years

3

1226

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.40 [0.03, 0.77]

4.4 Age 6‐16 years

1

236

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.37 [‐1.30, 0.56]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. Developing country RCT: Subgroup analysis: meals vs control
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 3. Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Weight gain kg‐ adjusted ICC 0.025 Show forest plot

6

984

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.48, 0.95]

2 Math change overall icc .15 Show forest plot

2

337

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.31 [0.09, 0.53]

3 Math change by nutritional status, icc 0.15 Show forest plot

5

337

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.44 [0.22, 0.67]

5 Height gain (cm)‐ adjusted ICC =0.016 Show forest plot

6

986

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.43 [0.46, 2.41]

9 subgroup analysis weight by sex Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

9.1 Agarwal boys

1

331

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.70 [0.42, 0.98]

9.2 Agarwal: girls

1

118

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.32, 1.28]

10 Subgroup analysis: height by sex Show forest plot

2

446

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.14 [‐0.73, 0.44]

10.1 agarwal boys

1

331

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.30 [‐1.01, 0.41]

10.2 agarwal girls

1

115

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.20 [‐0.85, 1.25]

11 Subgroup by age: weight gain in kg ‐ Agarwal adjusted Show forest plot

12

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

11.1 Ages 5‐6 years

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.70, 1.20]

11.2 Age 6‐8 years

6

564

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.53 [0.16, 0.91]

11.3 Age 9‐10 years

4

212

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.90 [0.59, 1.21]

11.4 Age 6‐16 years

1

140

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.21 [‐0.86, 1.28]

12 Subgroup by age: height gain in cm ‐ Agarwal adjusted Show forest plot

12

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

12.1 Ages 5‐6 years

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

2.62 [2.22, 3.02]

12.2 Age 6‐8 years

6

564

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.25 [‐0.02, 2.51]

12.3 Age 9‐10 years

4

178

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.22 [‐0.88, 0.44]

12.4 Age 6‐16 years

1

140

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.20 [‐1.35, 1.75]

13 Full scale IQ (total): adjusted‐ICC 0.15 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.90 [‐2.88, 10.68]

21 Full scale IQ (separated): cluster size as in analysis: icc = .15 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.80 [0.51, 7.10]

24 Performance IQ (separated): numbers as in analysis: ICC = 0.15 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.74 [1.73, 9.74]

26 Performance IQ (total): adjusted‐ICC 0.15 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.0 [‐2.60, 12.60]

28 Verbal IQ (separated): cluster size as in analysis: ICC= 0.15 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.35 [‐0.21, 6.92]

29 Verbal IQ (total): adjusted‐ ICC 0.15 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.10 [‐2.99, 9.19]

36 Percent weight for age: ICC= .025 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.90 [‐0.40, 2.20]

40 Percent height for age: ICC= 0.016 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.75 [‐1.11, ‐0.39]

44 Change in reading: ICC= .15 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.11, 0.29]

47 change in spelling: ICC= .15 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.24 [0.01, 0.47]

56 change in attendance: icc = .15 Show forest plot

1

108

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

4.95 [‐3.56, 13.46]

57 End of study: attendance: icc = .15 Show forest plot

1

72

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.23 [‐17.93, 17.47]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 4. developed country: school meal versus control: CBA

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

2 Weight gain: Corry‐Mann alone Show forest plot

1

102

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.42 [1.19, 1.65]

7 Height gain in cm. adjusted ICC=0.016 Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.16, 1.67]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 4. developed country: school meal versus control: CBA
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 5. Developed country: School meal vs control RCT

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 change in height Show forest plot

1

520

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.28 [‐0.01, 0.57]

2 Subgroup analysis: height by sex Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 bakerboys

1

267

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.11 [‐0.22, 0.44]

2.2 baker girls

1

253

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.45 [‐0.03, 0.93]

3 change in weight (kg) Show forest plot

1

520

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.13 [‐0.23, 0.49]

4 Subgroup analysis: weight by sex Show forest plot

2

520

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [‐0.19, 0.49]

4.1 bakerboys

1

267

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.21 [‐0.23, 0.65]

4.2 baker girls

1

253

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.05 [‐0.51, 0.61]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 5. Developed country: School meal vs control RCT
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 10. Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

5 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01 Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.47 [0.10, 0.84]

6 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05 Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.18, 0.54]

7 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1 Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.19, 0.52]

9 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.01 Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.32, 1.11]

10 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.05 Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.29 [‐0.34, 0.91]

11 Height gain (cm), sensitivity ICC 0.1 Show forest plot

3

1462

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.21 [‐0.33, 0.76]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 10. Developing country: School meal vs control. RCT‐ Sensitivity
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 11. Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Math change overall icc .1 Show forest plot

2

337

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.27 [0.03, 0.51]

2 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01 Show forest plot

6

989

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.71 [0.49, 0.94]

3 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05 Show forest plot

6

989

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.47, 0.96]

4 Weight gain kg‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1 Show forest plot

6

989

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.72 [0.46, 0.97]

5 Math change overall icc .2 Show forest plot

2

337

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.27 [‐0.03, 0.56]

6 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.01 Show forest plot

6

986

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.42 [0.41, 2.43]

7 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.05 Show forest plot

6

986

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.50 [0.62, 2.37]

8 Height gain (cm)‐ sensitivity ICC 0.1 Show forest plot

6

986

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.61 [0.83, 2.39]

11 Percent height for age: icc = 0.05 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.75 [‐1.18, ‐0.32]

12 Percent height for age: icc = .1 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.75 [‐1.27, ‐0.23]

14 Full scale IQ (total)‐ sensitivity 0.1 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.90 [‐1.96, 9.76]

16 Math (change) by nutritional status: cluster size as in analysis Sensitivity ICC=0.2 Show forest plot

5

337

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.41 [0.18, 0.63]

17 Math (change) by nutritional status: cluster size as in analysis Sensitivity ICC=0.1 Show forest plot

5

337

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.49 [0.27, 0.72]

18 Full scale IQ (total)‐ sensitivity 0.20 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.90 [‐3.69, 11.49]

20 Full scale IQ (end study): sensitivity cluster size as in analysis ICC= 0.1 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.85 [0.79, 6.91]

22 Full scale IQ (end study): sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.76 [0.26, 7.26]

23 Performance IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC= 0.1 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

5.78 [2.12, 9.45]

25 Performance IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.69 [1.38, 10.00]

27 Verbal IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analyses: ICC = 0.1 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.32 [‐0.03, 6.67]

29 Verbal IQ (end study): Sensitivity cluster size as in analysis: ICC = 0.2 Show forest plot

4

231

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

3.36 [‐0.48, 7.20]

30 Percentage standard weight. Sensitivity = 0.01 Show forest plot

1

70

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.90 [‐0.59, 2.39]

32 Percent weight for age: Sensitivity ICC= 0.05 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.90 [‐0.56, 2.36]

33 Percent weight for age: Sensitivity ICC= 0.1 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.90 [‐0.83, 2.63]

36 Verbal IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.10 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.10 [‐2.17, 8.37]

37 Verbal IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.20 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.10 [‐3.72, 9.92]

38 Performance IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.10 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.0 [‐1.57, 11.57]

39 Percentage standard height. Sensitivity = .01 Show forest plot

1

70

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.74 [‐1.18, ‐0.30]

41 Performance IQ (total): sensitivity‐0.20 Show forest plot

1

231

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.00 [‐3.50, 13.50]

45 change in reading: sensitivity ICC= .1 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.09, 0.27]

46 change in reading: sensitivity ICC= .2 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.09 [‐0.13, 0.31]

50 change in spelling: sensitivity ICC= .1 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.02, 0.44]

52 change in spelling: sensitivity ICC= 0.2 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.23 [‐0.01, 0.47]

58 Change in attendance: sensitivity = .10 Show forest plot

1

108

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.95 [‐2.64, 12.54]

59 change in attendance: sensitivity = .20 Show forest plot

1

108

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.95 [‐4.40, 14.30]

60 End of study attendance: sensitivity icc = .10 Show forest plot

1

72

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.23 [‐14.69, 14.23]

61 End of study attendance: sensitvity icc at .2 Show forest plot

1

72

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.23 [‐18.69, 18.23]

62 Change in Attendace: Sensitivity = .05 Show forest plot

1

106

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.95 [‐1.65, 11.55]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 11. Developing country: School meal vs control. CBA ‐ Sensitivity
Navigate to table in Review
Comparison 12. Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

3 Weight gain in kg‐ sensitivity icc=0.01. Leighton 1929 used for Orr Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.84 [0.34, 1.34]

4 Weight gain in kg.‐ sensitivity icc=0.05. Leighton used for Orr Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.31, 1.41]

5 Weight gain in kg. ‐ sensitivity ICC=0.1. Leighton used for Orr Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.31, 1.45]

7 Height gain in cm. adjusted ICC=0.016 Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.92 [0.16, 1.67]

8 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.01 Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.91 [0.19, 1.64]

9 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.05 Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.09, 1.79]

10 Height gain in cm. sensitivity ICC=0.1 Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.06, 1.87]

12 Height gain in cm. Leighton used for Orr. Sensitivity 0.01 Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.80, 1.22]

13 Height gain in cm. Sensitivity ICC = 0.05. Leighton used for Orr Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.80, 1.22]

14 Height gain in cm. Sensitivity ICC = .1. Leighton used for Orr Show forest plot

4

703

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.80, 1.22]
Figures and Tables -
Comparison 12. Developed country: school meal versus control: CBA ‐ Sensitivity
Navigate to table in Review