Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:08:34.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Physical growth and neurointegrative performance of survivors of protein–energy malnutrition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Sheila M. Pereira ,
Regina Sundararaj  and
Almas Begum
Sheila M. Pereira
Affiliation:
Nutrition Research Unit, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore 632 004, India
Regina Sundararaj
Affiliation:
Nutrition Research Unit, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore 632 004, India
Almas Begum
Affiliation:
Nutrition Research Unit, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Vellore 632 004, India
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1.The anthropometric measurements and neurointegrative performance of seventy-nine children aged 6–12 years who had survived kwashiorkor in early childhood were compared to those of 142 children who served as controls.

2. For the boys the differences in height and weight between those who had survived protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) and the controls were significant (P < 0.01).

3. For the girls the differences in height and weight between those who had survived PEM and the controls were not significant.

4. In the tests chosen, the performances of the survivors of PEM was significantly poorer than that of the controls.

5. There was no improvement in the performance when thirteen survivors were reassessed at 10 years of age.

6. There was a significant difference in scholastic performance between the survivors of PEM and the normal controls. The scholastic performance of the siblings of PEM survivors was also significantly better than that of the PEM survivors.

7. The dietary intakes at the time of reassessment were unsatisfactory in 25% of the survivors, but did not relate to their scholastic abilities.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , September 1979 , pp. 165 - 171
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1979

References

Botha-Antoun, E., Babayan, S. & Harfouche, J. K. (1968). J. trop. Pediat. 14, 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabak, V. & Najdanvic, R. (1965). Archs Dis. Childh. 40, 532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1953). A Guide to Mental Testing. 3rd ed. p. 46, London: University of London Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Champakam, S., Srikantia, S. G. & Gopalan, C. (1968). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 21, 844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cravioto, J., De Licardie, E. R. & Birch, H. G. (1966). Pediatrics 38, 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cravioto, J., De Licardie, E. R., Pinero, C., Lindoro, M., Arroyo, M. & Alcade, E. (1971). Proc. India Nutr. Soc. 10, 192.Google Scholar
Gopalan, C. & Ramalingaswami, V. (1955). Indian J. med. Res. 43, 751.Google Scholar
Lancet, (1971). Lancet ii, 303.Google Scholar
Liang, P. H., Hie, T. T., Jan, O. H. & Giok, L. T. (1967). Am. J. clin. Nutr. 20, 1290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monckeberg, F. (1975). Brain Function and Malnutrition: Neuropsychological Methods of Assessment, p. 15 [Prescott, J. W.Read, M. S. and Coursin, D. B., editors] New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Nelson Text book of Pediatrics (1975). 10th edition, Asian, pp 40–41, [Vaughan, V. C.McKay, R. J. and Nelson, W. E., editors] Tokyo: Igaku Shoin.Google Scholar
Pasricha, S. (1959). Indian J. med. Res. 47, 207.Google Scholar
Rao, B. R. H. & Rao, P. S. S. (1958). Indian J. med. Sci. 12, 726.Google Scholar
Stoch, M. B. & Smythe, P. M. (1963). Archs Dis. Childh. 38, 546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, J. K. G., Dumm, M. E. & Pereira, S. M. (1963). Report on Seminar on Protein Malnutrition in Children, Hyderabad, India.Google Scholar
WHO (1973) Tech. Rep. Ser. Wld Hlth Org. no. 522.Google Scholar