Ritu Rana

Dr. Ritu Rana

Nutrition Research Advisor (MAMI), GOAL Global, Dublin, A96 C7W7, Ireland
+1
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
21 November 2019 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RTRebecca Tobi
Rebecca Tobi
FHFrancesca Harris
Francesca Harris
Ritu RanaRitu Rana
Ritu Rana
KBKa Brown
Ka Brown
MQmatthew quaife
matthew quaife
RGRosemary Green
Rosemary Green
Global food systems are currently challenged by unsustainable and unhealthy consumption and production practices. Food labelling provides information on key characteristics of food items, thereby potentially driving more sustainable food choices or demands. This review explores how consumers value three different elements of sustainable diets: Comparing consumer response to nutrition information on food labels against environmental and/or social responsibility information. Six databases were systematically searched for studies examining consumer choice/preference/evaluation of nutrition against environmental and/or social responsibility attributes on food labels. Studies were quality assessed against domain-based criteria and reported using PRISMA guidelines. Thirty articles with 19,040 participants met inclusion criteria. Study quality was mixed, with samples biased towards highly-educated females. Environmental and social responsibility attributes were preferred to nutrition attributes in 17 studies (11 environmental and six social), compared to nine where nutrition attributes were valued more highly. Three studies found a combination of attributes were valued more highly than either attribute in isolation. One study found no significant preference. The most preferred attribute was organic labelling, with a health inference likely. Consumers generally have a positive view of environmental and social responsibility food labelling schemes. Combination labelling has potential, with a mix of sustainable diet attributes appearing well-received.

25 June 2011 in Journal of Food Science and Technology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Ritu RanaRitu Rana
Ritu Rana
RRRita Singh Raghuvanshi
Rita Singh Raghuvanshi

9 July 2020 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Ritu RanaRitu Rana
Ritu Rana
MMMarie A McGrath
Marie A McGrath
PGParidhi Gupta
Paridhi Gupta
ETEkta Thakur
Ekta Thakur
Marko KeracMarko Kerac
Marko Kerac
(1) Introduction: Current evidence on managing infants under six months with growth failure or other nutrition-related risk is sparse and low quality. This review aims to inform research priorities to fill this evidence gap, focusing on breastfeeding practices. (2) Methods: We searched PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and Cochrane Library for studies on feeding interventions that aim to restore or improve the volume or quality of breastmilk and breastfeeding when breastfeeding practices are sub-optimal or prematurely stopped. We included studies from both low- and middle-income countries and high-income countries. (3) Results: Forty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were from high-income countries (n = 35, 74.5%) and included infants who were at risk of growth failure at birth (preterm infants/small for gestational age) and newborns with early growth faltering. Interventions included formula fortification or supplementation (n = 31, 66%), enteral feeds (n = 8, 17%), cup feeding (n = 2, 4.2%), and other (n = 6, 12.8%). Outcomes included anthropometric change (n = 40, 85.1%), reported feeding practices (n = 16, 34%), morbidity (n = 11, 23.4%), and mortality (n = 5, 10.6%). Of 31 studies that assessed formula fortification or supplementation, 30 reported anthropometric changes (n = 17 no effect, n = 9 positive, n = 4 mixed), seven morbidity (n = 3 no effect, n = 2 positive, n = 2 negative), five feeding (n = 2 positive, n = 2 no effect, n = 1 negative), and four mortality (n = 3 no effect, n = 1 negative). Of eight studies that assessed enteral feed interventions, seven reported anthropometric changes (n = 4 positive, n = 3 no effect), five feeding practices (n = 2 positive, n = 2 no effect, n = 1 negative), four morbidity (n = 4 no effect), and one reported mortality (n = 1 no effect). Overall, interventions with positive effects on feeding practices were cup feeding compared to bottle-feeding among preterm; nasogastric tube feed compared to bottle-feeding among low birth weight preterm; and early progressive feeding compared to delayed feeding among extremely low birth weight preterm. Bovine/cow milk feeding and high volume feeding interventions had an unfavourable effect, while electric breast pump and Galactagogue had a mixed effect. Regarding anthropometric outcomes, overall, macronutrient fortified formula, cream supplementation, and fortified human milk formula had a positive effect (weight gain) on preterm infants. Interventions comparing human breastmilk/donor milk with formula had mixed effects. Overall, only human milk compared to formula intervention had a positive effect on morbidity among preterm infants, while none of the interventions had any positive effect on mortality. Bovine/cow milk supplementation had unfavourable effects on both morbidity and mortality. (4) Conclusion: Future research should prioritise low- and middle-income countries, include infants presenting with growth failure in the post-neonatal period and record effects on morbidity and mortality outcomes.

20 February 2021 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Ritu RanaRitu Rana
Ritu Rana
MMMarie A McGrath
Marie A McGrath
ESEkta Sharma
Ekta Sharma
PGParidhi Gupta
Paridhi Gupta
Marko KeracMarko Kerac
Marko Kerac
Small and nutritionally at-risk infants under six months, defined as those with wasting, underweight, or other forms of growth failure, are at high-risk of mortality and morbidity. The World Health Organisation 2013 guidelines on severe acute malnutrition highlight the need to effectively manage this vulnerable group, but programmatic challenges are widely reported. This review aims to inform future management strategies for small and nutritionally at-risk infants under six months in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by synthesising evidence on existing breastfeeding support packages for all infants under six months. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Global Health databases from inception to 18 July 2018. Intervention of interest were breastfeeding support packages. Studies reporting breastfeeding practices and/or caregivers’/healthcare staffs’ knowledge/skills/practices for infants under six months from LMICs were included. Study quality was assessed using NICE quality appraisal checklist for intervention studies. A narrative data synthesis using the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) reporting guideline was conducted and key features of successful programmes identified. Of 15,256 studies initially identified, 41 were eligible for inclusion. They were geographically diverse, representing 22 LMICs. Interventions were mainly targeted at mother–infant pairs and only 7% (n = 3) studies included at-risk infants. Studies were rated to be of good or adequate quality. Twenty studies focused on hospital-based interventions, another 20 on community-based and one study compared both. Among all interventions, breastfeeding counselling (n = 6) and education (n = 6) support packages showed the most positive effect on breastfeeding practices followed by breastfeeding training (n = 4), promotion (n = 4) and peer support (n = 3). Breastfeeding education support (n = 3) also improved caregivers’ knowledge/skills/practices. Identified breastfeeding support packages can serve as "primary prevention" interventions for all infants under six months in LMICs. For at-risk infants, these packages need to be adapted and formally tested in future studies. Future work should also examine impacts of breastfeeding support on anthropometry and morbidity outcomes. The review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018102795).

21 July 2021 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CGCarlos Grijalva-Eternod
Carlos Grijalva-Eternod
EBEmma Beaumont
Emma Beaumont
Ritu RanaRitu Rana
Ritu Rana
NANahom Abate
Nahom Abate
HBHatty Barthorp
Hatty Barthorp
MAMelkamu Berhane Arefayine
Melkamu Berhane Arefayine
A poor understanding of malnutrition burden is a common reason for not prioritizing the care of small and nutritionally at-risk infants aged under-six months (infants u6m). We aimed to estimate the anthropometric deficit prevalence in infants u6m attending health centres, using the Composite Index of Anthropometric Failure (CIAF), and to assess the overlap of different individual indicators. We undertook a two-week survey of all infants u6m visiting 18 health centres in two zones of the Oromia region, Ethiopia. We measured weight, length, and MUAC (mid-upper arm circumference) and calculated weight-for-length (WLZ), length-for-age (LAZ), and weight-for-age z-scores (WAZ). Overall, 21.7% (95% CI: 19.2; 24.3) of infants u6m presented CIAF, and of these, 10.7% (95% CI: 8.93; 12.7) had multiple anthropometric deficits. Low MUAC overlapped with 47.5% (95% CI: 38.0; 57.3), 43.8% (95% CI: 34.9; 53.1), and 42.6% (95% CI: 36.3; 49.2) of the stunted, wasted, and CIAF prevalence, respectively. Underweight overlapped with 63.4% (95% CI: 53.6; 72.2), 52.7% (95% CI: 43.4; 61.7), and 59.6% (95% CI: 53.1; 65.9) of the stunted, wasted, and CIAF prevalence, respectively. Anthropometric deficits, single and multiple, are prevalent in infants attending health centres. WAZ overlaps more with other forms of anthropometric deficits than MUAC.

12 November 2021 in Global Health: Science and Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Ritu RanaRitu Rana
Ritu Rana
HBHatty Barthorp
Hatty Barthorp
MMMarie McGrath
Marie McGrath
MKMarko Kerac
Marko Kerac
MMMark Myatt
Mark Myatt
In recent years, community-based management of acute malnutrition (CMAM) has revolutionized the care for children by increasing treatment coverage. Critical to the success of CMAM is early case identification. Mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) measurement is a widely used, practical anthropometric measure used at the community level for the identification and admission of cases to appropriate treatment services. Globally, many organizations and government services use MUAC tapes for early case detection. However, there is no one universal MUAC tape specification, and it has been observed that using different MUAC tapes results in different measurements. In this article, we aim to: (1) present the measurement discrepancies; (2) discuss design specifications and their effect on case identification and admissions; (3) present a call to action to agree on common design specifications and standardized reporting. We hope this article will catalyze discussion and practical actions among nutrition and health stakeholders to ensure we have common MUAC tape design specifications so that all eligible at-risk children will get an equal chance to be identified early for critical treatment. Key Messages There is no standard mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) tape specification. Alerted by programmers in Ethiopia, we found using tapes of varied design results in measurement discrepancies and potential for systematic bias. This impacts case identification and the number of children eligible for treatment. At-risk children may be excluded from receiving the critical treatment they need. While some organizations use corrected tapes to account for design differences, many do not. Tapes used to validate current MUAC thresholds are not reported. We propose practitioners report on tape specifications used and call for global standardization of MUAC tape design and examination of possible implications for current MUAC thresholds.