child stunting

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

Children in the intervention group had significantly lower stunting prevalence (28.6%) compared with the control group (33.5%) from birth to the 13th month of follow-up in Nairobi urban slums.

Effect: improvement; 28.6% vs 33.5% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)

At the 55-month follow-up, stunting prevalence remained lower in the intervention group (11.1%) compared with the control group (13.9%), with a particularly significant reduction among boys (8.3% vs 1

Effect: improvement; 11.1% vs 13.9% stunting prevalence (intervention vs control)