2021
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1157329/v1
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Role of Iron in the Reduction of Anemia Among Women of Reproductive Age in Low-Middle Income Countries: Insights From Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract: BackgroundIron deficiency anemia is a common public health problem problem among women of reproductive age (WRA) as it is can lead to unfavorable maternal and birth outcomes. Although studies are undertaken to assess the efficacy of iron, there are some gaps and limitations in the existing studies that need to be addressed. To address the gaps, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the existing evidence regarding the role of iron in decreasing anemia among WRA in low-middle-income countr… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 17 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ali et al (2022) and Lops et al (2021) reported similar findings. Ali et al (2022), from their meta-review of 19 SRs on WRA, reported the effectiveness of oral iron therapy using iron tablets on Hb and SF concentrations in WRA from LMICs ( 43 ). Lopes et al (2021) in their review of 5 SRs focusing on iron therapy using oral and intravenous iron supplements on WRA, showed similar findings to the current meta-review ( 6 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ali et al (2022) and Lops et al (2021) reported similar findings. Ali et al (2022), from their meta-review of 19 SRs on WRA, reported the effectiveness of oral iron therapy using iron tablets on Hb and SF concentrations in WRA from LMICs ( 43 ). Lopes et al (2021) in their review of 5 SRs focusing on iron therapy using oral and intravenous iron supplements on WRA, showed similar findings to the current meta-review ( 6 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%