Instructions to save file:

SAVE YOUR EXCEL FILE AS "EXTRACTION CODE" as defined by:

<coder letter><Category of intervention><number>

Coder letter

Category of interventions

number
Example/explanation:

The 1st nutrition intervention coded by

Rucha Shelgikar will be labelled as:
BN1
If Aisha Yousafzai has already coded 2
Integration interventions, the third one
that she will code will be labelled as
follows:
AI3

refer to 'Coder list' Sheet

Nutrition: N
Parenting: P
Integration: I

The serial number within each catergory

of interventions coded by one coder -
consecutive numbers per coders
 Classification based on intervention
Use Sheet 'Nutirion':
• If ALL
components/arms/parts
of the intervention in
the program are on only
nutrition:
°Breastfeeding
intervention Vs Control
°Complementary
feeding Vs Control
°Advice on Improving
parent child interactions
ONLY while meal times
Vs.Control
°Supplement A vs.
Supplement B vs.
Control
Use Sheet 'Parenting':
• If ALL
components/arms/parts
of the intervention in
the program are on only
parenting and Not
related to nutrition:
° Play based intervention
vs control
° Intervention targetted
on parents reading
books to their children
vs control
° Promoting Father-child
interactions in play vs.
mother-child
interactions vs. control
Use Sheet 'Integration':
• If at least one
component/arm/part of
the intervention is on
nutrition/parenting
while at least one
component/arm/part of
the intervention is on
parenting/nutrition:
° Intervention on
Complementary feeding
vs. Intervention on
responsive
complementary feeding
and play vs. control
• If at least one
component/arm/part of
the intervention is an
integrated nutrition-
parenting intervention
° Intervention on
responsive feeding and
play vs. control
Use Sheet 'Integration':
If at least one
omponent/arm/part of
he intervention is on
utrition/parenting
while at least one
omponent/arm/part of
he intervention is on
arenting/nutrition:
Intervention on
omplementary feeding
s. Intervention on
esponsive
omplementary feeding
nd play vs. control
If at least one
omponent/arm/part of
he intervention is an
ntegrated nutrition-
arenting intervention
Intervention on
esponsive feeding and
lay vs. control
Coder Name Coder letter
Aisha Yousafzai A
Rucha Shelgikar B
Rina Agustina C
Tina Rachman D
Akrim Said E
Okky Lupita F
Riani Witaningrum G
Nadia H
I
Term
Adjusted variables

Antenatal period
Attrition
Barriers in implementation

Blinding

Caregiver

Category of intervention

Child
Coder Letter

Compliance

Content processes

Control group

Country Platform

Delivery agent
Delivery platform
Delivery Strategy

Design of evaluations
Design processes

Development outcomes
Early childhood
Effect size
Enablers in implementation

Equity in recruitment

Family

Fidelity

Framework
GDP/capita

Generalisability

HDI

Home environment

Infant
Information as a strategy for
behavior change
Intermediate Beneficiary

Intervention
Level of Evidence
Low birth weight
Materials as a strategy for
behavior change
Media as a strategy for
behavior change
Mediator

Moderator
Multisectoral

Neonate
Nurturing care

Outcomes

Overnutrition
Overweight

Parenting
Performance as a strategy for
behavior change

Post natal period

Problem solving skills as a
strategy for behavior change

Program Platform

Proof of concept

Quality

Reliability of a test
Representativeness in Sample

Reproducibility

Scale

Sector
Severe Acute Malnutrition

Social support as a strategy for

behavior change
Standard of care

Stimulation

Strategies of training
Structure of curriculum
Structure of supervision

Structure of training

Study
Stunting

Supervisor

Sustainability

Target population
Targetted Beneficiary

Theory of Change

Trainer
Undernutrition

Underweight

Wasting
Definition
Vairables which have been controlled in the analysis to reduce their effect
on the outcome variable
Period in pregnancy upto child birth
Decrease in the number of participants during the period of the study
Obstacles in implementation

Concealment of group allocation from members conducting the study to

reduce bias in a study
UNICEF: A person who cares for, nurtures, loves and looks after one or more
children; role is similar to that of a parent.
For this data extraction, interventions are classified as one of the three:
Nutrition
Parenting
Integration

UNICEF: Human between the age 0-18

Unique alphabet letter given to each coder to be found in the coder list
sheet
The act of complying with the message or instruction given by the delivery
agent
Processes/pathways in the intervention/program that are related to the
content that impact outcomes
Population that did not receive the intervention, but constitute as
comparison for the population that receives the intervention
The existing delivery platform present country-wide or state-wide for either
nutrition, parenting or both
The person who delivers the intervention
Describe the level at which intervention is delivered
Process of delivering the intervention

Design used in the study to evaluate outcomes

Processes/pathways in the intervention/program that are related to the
design that impact outcomes

Motor, Cognitive, Socio-emotional, Language outcomes in children

UNICEF: Period from birth till age 8 years
Quantification of the difference between the two groups over and above
statistical significance, independent of sample size
Facilitators in implementation

Process of recruitment of participants (families) based on the inclusion

criteria ensuring that all those who are targetted are reached out

UNICEF: Individuals who live together (either through

birth or by agreement) and provide care,
nurturing and socialisation for one another.
how much the delivered program differed from what was intended

Structure that can hold or support the theory of the project

A measure of a country's standard of living based of the gross domestic
product
The quality of the intervention to be used with a different population or
larger population

Human Development Index is a measure of a country's human development

based on life expentancy, per capita income and education

Aspects of the home that contribute to living conditions and impact children

Any individual 0-1 year of age

Behavior change in recepients brought about by delivery agent by providing
information
The person who receives the intervention from the delivery agent

The program that is being studied

Kind of evidence produced
weight of child at birth <2500 grams
Briscoe et al: Materials that the families would not possess/buy on their
own that were provided to facilitate health behavior change
Biscoe et al: Use of any form of media to bring about behavior changes

Intervening variable that accounts for the relationship between predictor

variable and outcome variable
Variable that affects the direction or strength of relationship between
predictor variable and outcome variable
Interventions that promote early child development are multi-faceted
comprising a range of inputs for a child to thrive (e.g. health, hygiene,
nutrition, early learning, protection), transitions in the life course (e.g.
prenatal care, infant stimulation, preschool services) and targets (e,g., child,
mother, family, community) necessitating the role of more than one sector
for the delivery of interventions. A multisectoral approach enables smart
delivery of the wide ranging interventions and creates an environment
conducive for successful outcomes, scaling-up and sustainability of impacts.

Birth to 28 days of life

Britto et al., Lancet, 2016. Nurturing Care refers to a core set of inter-
connected behaviours, attitudes and knowledge that support caregiving
pertaining to health, hygiene, nutrition and feeding, stimulation and early
learning opportunities, responsiveness, stability, safety and protection from
harm in order to optimally promote early child development.

Medium term results in an intervention/program related to the main aim of

the program
Malnutrition- excessive consumption of nutrients
WHO: above +2 z score for weight for height WHO Standards, or BMI for age
WHO Standards
the process of raising a child by caretakers
Briscoe et al: Performance includes modelling or demonstrations, actual
rehearsal or practice of the behaviour in the intervention setting, feedback
on performance, contingent rewards, and identification of cues to action
such as events requiring hand washing and signals of child hunger.

Period of time in a child's life after birth

Briscoe et al: Problem solving includes the identification of facilitators of the
behaviour, internal or external barriers, and solutions to over- coming the
barriers, performed with individuals or groups.
The proposed delivery platform through which interventions will be
delivered in the program
evidence, typically derived from an experiment or pilot project, which
demonstrates that a design concept, business proposal, etc., is feasible.

The quality of the intervention and dosage delivered is the skill with which
the delivery agent delivers the intervention and it depends upon the skills,
motivation, and buy-in of the health worker/delivery agent.
Test reliablility refers to the degree to which a test is consistent and stable in
measuring what it is intended to measure.
How well the sample represents the population it is attempting to intervene
in
Ability of the intervention to be duplicated by a different team, or in a
different location or with a different sample set
The scaling-up of services refers to the process by which effective, evidence-
based, affordable interventions reach more people, equitably and in a
manner that can be sustained. In addition to increased coverage, the scope
and quality of scaling-up can encompass new interventions and innovations,
new beneficiaries, and depth of services in the existing portfolio.

Administrative branch that the program is being run as a part of

WHO: Severe acute malnutrition is defined by a very low weight for height
(below -3z scores of the median WHO growth standards), by visible severe
wasting, or by the presence of nutritional oedema.
Use of various members of the society/community to bring about behavior
change
Usual practice or intervention that is being given to the general population

Act of engaging the child, or stimulating a child during parent-child

interactions
The methods used while training
The way contents are arranged in the curriculum
The way a supervision session is arranged

The way contents are taught in the training

Research study/article/report that is being extracted

WHO: moderate stunting as height for age between -3 and -2 z-scores.
Severe stunting: height-for-age less than -3 z-scores

The person who provides support, mentorship and supervision to the

delviery agent while the program is being implemented
WB: ability of a project to maintain an acceptable level of benefit flows
through its economic life

Population in whom primary outcome is to be studied

Final beneficiary of the intervention

A description of the pathways and processes that illustrate how and why the
programs will achieve the outcomes in the given context
The person who trains the delivery agent to delivery the intervention
UNICEF: Undernutrition is defined as the outcome of insufficient food intake
and repeated infectious diseases.
UNICEF: Moderate - between -3 to -2 z scores for WHO Standards weight for
age;
severe - below -3 z for WHO Standards weight for age.
WHO: moderate wasting as weight-for-height between -3 and -2 z-scores.
Severe: below -3z for weight for height WHO Standards
Examples if any
E.g. adjusted for age, sex, maternal education etc.

E.g. family moves to a different city, death of the child etc.

At policy level, at government officials level, at political milieau level, financial
barriers etc
e.g. the psychologist who runs a panel of tests for outcome analysis is not aware if
the child has received the intervention or not.

Use the "algorithm for classification" sheet to classify the intervention into one of
the three categories

e.g. when the health worker asks the mother to play with the child, the mother
plays with the child everyday
E.g. information about parenting leads to better parent-child interactions which
leads to better child development outcomes

E.g. community health care workers, village volunteers, teachers, etc.

E.g. Home based, school based, community based, group based, etc.
E.g. where was the location of the delivery of the intervention, was it a one-on-one
or group meeting, etc.
E.g. RCT, cluster RCT, etc.
E.g. Having community health workers deliver nutrtion and stimulation combined
messages reduced the number of individual messages delivered to the parents
which leads to better compliance to the messages.
helpful policy, management level buy-in, etc.

E.g. Does the program fairly recruit all the targetted beneficiaries - Does it leave
behind any of the targetted beneficiaries from the recruitment

(Borelli:) Key components of fidelity are: Treatment content as delivered to both

intervention and comparison groups, delivery strategy, training and supervision
of providers, receipt of the treatment by participants, and enactment of the
treatment skills by participants.

Please use the Sheet WB GDP per Capita

please use the Sheet HDI 2015 UNDP

Socioeconomic conditions, psychosocial interactions and cultural milieu

Instructions on 'How to prepare food for the child'

'How to feed the child'
E.g. In a Child nutrition intervention, where the mother is given informational
material and supplements so that she can feed the child, the child is the targetted
beneficiary, and the mother is the intermediate beneficiary
Nutrition/parenting/combination/other silos
e.g. efficacy, effectiveness,

E.g. books, toys given to facilitate parent child interactions.

E.g. TV Advertisements, distribution of posters, organization of role plays and

dramas
E.g. preparing complementary foods in front/with the mother

Problem solve different ways to make food tasty and healthy

e.g. test re-test reliability, inter-rater reliablity

Eg: agricuture, nutrition, heath, education, social welfare

Assembling communities to discuss health problems and find solutions

e.g. mandatory government preschool program

playing with a child, talking with the child, etc.

lectures, roleplays, mock demonstrations, breakouts in groups, etc.

e.g are there separate chapters/volumes on nutrition and separate
chapters/volumes
e.g for ECD,
are there separate or is there within
sessions/parts integration at the level
one session of the curriculum
on nutrition and ECD, or is
how many
there nutrition
integration only/ECD
at the level ofonly/Nutrition + ECD integration chapters are there
the supervision
how many nutrition only/ECD only/Nutrition + ECD integration supervision sessions
are there

e.g. are there separate sessions/trainers/locations for nutrition and ECD or is there
integration at the level of training?
How many nutrition only/ECD only/Nutrition + ECD integration sessions are there?

Could be the same person as the trainer

e.g. children 0-3 and/or their mothers.

E.g. In a Child nutrition intervention, where the mother is given informational
material and supplements so that she can feed the child, the child is the targetted
beneficiary, and the mother is the intermediate beneficiary
E.g. before implementing the program, what were the pathways through which the
program was supposed to achieve the outcomes?
Could be the same person as the supervisor
 Item
Heading Subheading Item
No.

1 Author

2 Citation

Data extraction
3 completion date
Extraction Details
4 Extraction code

Country of the
5 program

HDI of the
6
country

GDP per capita of

7 the country

Country level
8 Major child
nutrition indices

Country level
information
Country level
9 Anemia data

Country level
Major Child
10 Development
indices
 Major
nutritive/stimulati
11 on initiatives in
the country
12 Sector

13 Delivery platform
14 f
 Representativene
15
ss in sample

Equity in reach of
16 intervention(s)

17 Aim of evaluation

18 Evaluation Funder

Evaluation
19 Conductor

Evaluation (Please 20 Implementation

fill the adjoining evaluation
sheet for details on
the outcomes in
the study)
 Evaluation (Please 20 Implementation
fill the adjoining evaluation
sheet for details on
the outcomes in
the study) 21 Cost evaluation
Strengths of
22 evaluation

Limitations of
23 evaluation

Generalisability of
24 results

25 Scale

26 Sustainability

Addition to
27 knowledge bank
Usefulness of the
28
NOT TO BE intervention
Conclusion
FILLED Content
29 suggestions
Implementation
30
suggestion
Description

First author, along with contact details for the first author or the corresponding author as
mentioned in the paper

APA 6th Citation

Date when extraction is completed

Same as Excel File name: <coder letter><category of intervention><number>

Refer to Sheet 'File Saving Instructions'

Country where the program in the study was conducted

Please use the UNDP 2015 figures for HDI.

For Reference:
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report.pdf (Chapter 1,
Table A1.1, Page 47)

Please use the World Bank 2016 figures for GDP per capita.
For Reference: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD

UNICEF Country statistics for nutrition based on the WHO Standards for stunting,
wasting,underweight,overweight, low birth weight. Use data from 2012 - Only country
level data - no state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from
For reference: https://www.unicef.org/statistics/index_countrystats.html

WHO Anaemia in children under 5 years (% and year of survey) AND Anaemia in pregnant
women (% and year of survey) (Hb <110 g/L). Only country level data - no
state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from.
For reference: http://apps.who.int/nutrition/landscape/report.aspx

UNICEF: MICS data if applicable. Include the Round and summary of child development
indicators from Key Findings - Use data from the latest round available for the entire
country. If data for the entire country is from cycle 3, and later rounds have data only from
one state/part of the country, please use data from cycle 3 as it contains data from the
entire country
Only country level data - no state/district/city data
For Reference: http://mics.unicef.org/surveys - select country through the country filter.
Description of preexisting country-wide or local platform if any - fill in the notes section -
E.g.: alive and thrive, SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition), early learning program of WH

Sector of the intervention - finance, agriculture, social welfare, health etc.

Intervention levels - home based/community based/policy level intervention

° Curriculum details for this intervention (Such as Intervention/s content, curriculum, if

the curriculum is adapted, then the original curriculum, curriculum adaptation, etc.)

° Training for this intervention (Such as Number of days of training, topics of training,
structure of training, strategies of training, type of evaluation (Pre/post), trainer
characteristics (Qualification, experience , etc.))
° Supervision for this intervention (Such as Number of supervision sessions/supervisory
contacts, topics of supervision, documentation of supervision, etc.)

° Delivery agent details (Such as who is delivering, qualification of delivery agent

(education, experience), Incentive given to the agent for delivery of this intervention etc.)

° Behaviour change techniques used in the intervention (Such as provision of information

handouts or sheets; provision of materials such nutrition supplements or toys; problem
solving such as having conversations on how to make food tasty/nutritious; teaching by
doing an activity together such as making complementary foods with/in front of the
mother; use of media such as advertisements, radio shows, street plays etc; use of social
support and assembling communities together)

° Delivery strategy as intended and as actually implemented (Such as location, duration,

frequency of delivery contact, structure of delivery as group or one-on-one, if delivery
strategy is group, then ratio of group: delivery agent as intented and as actually
implemented, etc.)
° If this intervention is integrated in an exisiting platform then provide description for:
(Such as Name of existing service/program, description of services delivered in the
existing program, implementer details, service delivery agent details (Education and
experiencial qualification, training received for the existing intervention/program, pay
received in the existing platform), Additional qualifications for this intervention, training
for this intervention, supervision for this intervention, additional work, aditional
incentives, etc.)

° Information about intended beneficiaries (Such as age, intended indirect beneficiaries,

intended coverage number, intended coverage population description, intended control
group, service/intervention/standard of care received by control group. Also mention
characterisitics of the beneficiaries such as : rural/urban; low ses/high ses, specific
disadvantage group targeted: malnourished/children with disabilities/children with
specific conditions, etc.)

Is the sample that received the intervention representative of the population? (as
explicitly mentioned in the paper: this randomly selected sample is representative of the
population)

Is there equity in the reach of the intervention? ( did the intervention recruit everyone of
the targetted beneficiaries fairly?) as mentioned in the paper

What were the main aims of evlautions?

Who/Which organization funded the evaluation

Who/which organization conducted the evaluation

Describe as mentioned in the paper

° Whether and how fidelity, compliance, quality was assessed.
° The barriers and enablers for implementation
° Key learning for implementation
Cost effectiveness assessed or not, and the result of the same
Describe the strenths of the evaluation

Describe the limitations of the evaluation

Can the results be generalized?

Where can they be generalized? E.g. across the entire country/across entire population
from which sample is drawn from?
Describe as mentioned explicitly in the paper:
° At what level is this program being implemented - e.g. national level, state level, district
level, village level

° What kind of organization is implementing this program (Mention the name of the org as
well) - NGO/Government/Private organization/University/Coalitions and partnerships

° In which platform is this program nested under - Existing Governmental service delivery
platform like government preschool program/ Existing private platform like private school
systems or hospital systems etc. /Existing platform or a service in an NGO setup/a new
platform or service by government/a new platform or service by private sector/ a new
platform or service by NGO

Have the authors expicitly discussed future plans for the program in terms of:
° Replication
° Expansion
° Sustainability
If they have, then please mention page number and paragraph location from the paper

How did this program add to what was already known? Describe both positive and
negative findings

How useful is the program, and in which areas?

Which design suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Which implementation suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Data type

Name

Citation

mm/dd/yyyy

Alphanumeric
al

Name

Number

Number

Number

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
yes/no

yes/no

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Data Entry - Please fill in details for all arms of the intervention

Marie T Ruel, Food Consumption and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D
USA, m.ruel@cgiar.org
Ruel, M. T., Menon, P., Habicht, J. P., Loechl, C., Bergeron, G., Pelto, G., … Hankebo, B. (2008). Age-based preventive
food assistance and behaviour change and communication for reduction of childhood undernutrition in Haiti: a clus
randomised trial. The Lancet, 371(9612), 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60271-8

9/11/2017

HN2

Haiti

0.4928133516

739.5954362537

Stunting (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 21.9

Wasting (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 5.1
Underweight (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 11.4
Underweight (%) 2008-2012*, severe 3.1
Overweight (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 3.6
Low birthweight (%) 2008-2012*23

Anaemia in children under 5 years (62%, 2011)

Anaemia in pregnant women (48.0%, 2011) (Hb <110 g/L)

Not found
World Vision program of nutrition

health

community-based

Intervention: two different models of targeting food assistance to children and the behaviour change and communi
intervention to their mothers at the mothers’clubs: the traditional recuperative model and preventive model.
The only three aspects that diff er between the programmes are:
(1) eligibility criterion (age 6–23 months or weight-for-age Z scores less than –3 for children aged 24–59 months in t
preventive group vs weight-for-age Z scores less than –2 for children aged 6–59 months in the recuperative group);
(2) the duration of eligibility to receive the intervention for food and behaviour change and communication (9 mont
recuperative, up to 18 months for preventive);
(3) the focus, timing, sequencing, and number of sessions of the intervention for behaviour change and communica
mothers’ clubs

For the preventive model, a precise schedule was established to ensure that delivery of the information was age-sp
reached caregivers at the time when they most need the information.
For the recuperative model, the learning sessions were designed to address topics of relevance for undernourished
such as the causes of undernutrition, nutritious recipes, feeding during illness, and hygiene in food handling and sto
The mothers’ club sessions lasted around an hour, and were facilitated by health workers trained in both technical c
adult education techniques.

Curriculum: based on new 5-year programme implemented by World Vision-Haiti in the Central Plateau region of H

Not found
Not found

who is delivering: health workers

qualification of delivry agent: trained in both technical content and adult education techniques.
incentive: not found

The behaviour change and communication strategy used mothers’ clubs as the main venue for delivery. Extensive fo
research informed the development of relevant messages and the translation of the Pan American Health Organizati
Guiding Principles for Feeding Breastfed Children into feasible and locally acceptable child care and feeding practice
learning sessions was developed on topics such as healthy pregnancy, breastfeeding, child development, child carin
practices, hygiene in food handling and storage, and cooking demonstrations of nutrient-dense complementary foo

The health workers used various learning approaches (eg, demonstrations, food tasting, small group activities, and g
discussions)

Location: Central Plateau region of Haiti (The evaluation was done in three communes of Central Plateau—Hinche,
and Lascahobas)
Duration: 3 years (duration of research or duration of intervention in each subject?)
Frequency of delivery contact: not found
Structure of delivery: group (mother's club)
The programme off ers a range of services for pregnant and lactating women and for children 0–59 months of age, a
on five contact points between programme staff and benefi ciaries:
(a) rally posts, where Program of World Vision in Haiti, benefi ciary identifi cation is done, and where health educati
monitoring, and services for preventive maternal and child health and nutrition are provided; for children 0–5 years
include immunisation, vitamin A supplementation, and the provision of oral rehydration salts and anthelmintic drug
(b) mothers’ clubs, where small groups of benefi ciaries gather with programme health staff to discuss health, hygie
nutrition topics in the context of the programme’s behaviour change and communication strategy;
(c) food-distribution points, where benefi ciaries collect their monthly food rations;
(d) prenatal and postnatal consultations; and
(e) home visits for newborn infants or severely undernourished children.

Age: eligibility criterion (age 6–23 months or weight-for-age Z scores less than –3 for children aged 24–59 months in
preventive group vs weight-for-age Z scores less than –2 for children aged 6–59 months in the recuperative group);
of eligibility to receive the intervention for food and behaviour change and communication (9 months in recuperativ
months for preventive);
Intended coverage population: three communes of Central Plateau—Hinche, Thomonde, and Lascahobas
Traditional group --> malnourished children

not explicitly mentioned

Yes. There were no diff erences between the groups at baseline in any of the child anthropometric measures or in o
maternal, and household characteristics.
the data suggest a slight deterioration in prevalence of undernutrition in recuperative communities, especially in th
indicators (underweight and wasting). This finding is plausible in view of the severe political, economic, and climatic
experienced in Haiti during the 3 years of the study (2002–05).

the study did not include a control group, and therefore cannot assess the absolute eff ect of either model.

findings of the study are generalisable to similar resource-constrained populations, especially in view of the remark
patterns of growth faltering that are seen worldwide

Region level

World Vision

Existing platform or a service in an NGO setup

Replication: Not found

Expansion: Not found
Sustainability: Not found
 Design Blinding
Outcome a cluster-randomised Field workers in charge of data
Evaluation design collection for both
surveys were unaware of the study
objectives and were
unrelated to World Vision
programmes.

Likewise, World Vision staff were

responsible for programme
implementation and were not
involved in data collection
for the evaluation study.

Outcome (mention
if
primary/secondary Tool/test used to assess Is the test an adaptation of another
) outcome tool/test
compared Anthropometric
the effect on child measurements (height
growth of a and weight), the tools
preventive and a were not mentioned
recuperative
approach

not found

use of programme
Primary Outcome services in preventive and
#2 recuperative communities
Secondary
Outcome #1
Secondary
Outcome #2
not found

Sampling Strategy
Two cross-sectional surveys were done
to obtain information at baseline
(May–September, 2002) and exactly 3
years later in the
same communities (2005)
Which tool or test is it adapted from
Sample Number
Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria recruited at base
eligibility criterion (age 6–23 months or Recuperative (10
weight-for-age Z scores less than –3 for clusters, 746 children)
children aged 24–59 months in the
preventive group vs weight-for-age Z scores Preventive (10 clusters,
less than –2 for children aged 6–59 months 735 children)
in the recuperative group);
(2) the duration of eligibility to receive the
intervention for food and behaviour change
and communication (9 months in
recuperative, up to 18 months for
preventive);
Please fill out this table for all outcomes w
What is the reliability of the tool used in What is the frequency
the paper of measurement
not found not found before intervention,
after 3 year of
intervention (no more
details were found)

not found not found not found

 Sample attrition Reason for attrition, as mentioned
(%) in the paper
not found not found

his table for all outcomes with information as mentioned in the paper

What is the
location of
measurement Who conducts the measurement
not found field workers

not found not found

ned in the paper

Effect size (if

Result in brief (Raw and adjusted) (e.g. Without adjusting, the raw OR mentioned explicitly in
was x, after adjusting the OR was y) P value the paper/tables)
At the end of the 3-year intervention, children from preventive
communities had significantly higher mean Z scores for height for age
(+0·14), weight for age (+0·24), and weight for height (+0·24) than the
recuperative group (child-level means adjusted for cluster eff ect and for
child age and sex).

Differences in the prevalence of under nutrition (adjusted for child age

and sex using logit models) confirm the greater eff ect of the preventive
model: stunting, underweight, and wasting were 4, 6, and 4 percentage
points lower, respectively, in preventive than recuperative communities (fi
gure 2; p=0·10 for stunting; p=0·003 for underweight; p=0·008 for
wasting). The prevalence of severe undernutrition (Z score <–3) was also
lower in preventive than recuperative communities at fi nal survey, but
differences were significant only for underweight (5·7% in recuperative
communities compared with 3·4% in preventive communities).

The percentage of pregnant and lactating women who received food assistance
and who participated in mothers’ clubs was high (57–70%) and similar between
the two programme models, as expected by design. Use of programme services
for children was also high: over 95% of mothers in both groups report having
taken their children to the rally posts at least once (and on average 7 times)
between baseline and fi nal surveys, and 50% in the month preceding the survey.
As expected
given the diff erent targeting criteria, receipt of food assistance by children 6
months or older differed markedly between programme models: about 73% of
the children in preventive communities were ever enrolled in the programme (ie,
received food assistance), compared with only 28% in recuperative communities.
Effect Size (if not mentioned
in the paper and calculated Adjusted variables (e.g. age,
by the coder) sex, maternal education etc.)
(child-level means adjusted for
cluster effect and for child age
and sex)
 Item
Heading Subheading Item
No.

1 Author

2 Citation
Data extraction
3 completion date
Extraction Details
4 Extraction code

Country of the
5
program

6 HDI of the
country

GDP per capita of

7 the country

Country level
8 Major child
nutrition indices

Country level
information
Country level
9 Anemia data

Country level
Major Child
10 Development
indices

Major
nutritive/stimulati
11 on initiatives in
the country
12 Sector
13 Delivery platform

Intervention
details (Relevant
pieces on the
14 intervention from
all sections of the
paper)
 Intervention
details (Relevant
pieces on the
14 intervention from
all sections of the
paper)
 Representativene
15 ss in sample

Equity in reach of
16 intervention(s)

17 Aim of evaluation

18 Evaluation Funder

Evaluation
19 Conductor
Evaluation (Please
fill the adjoining
sheet for details on Implementation
the outcomes in 20 evaluation
the study)
21 Cost evaluation
Strengths of
22 evaluation
Limitations of
23 evaluation

Generalisability of
24 results

25 Scale
 25 Scale

26 Sustainability

Addition to
27 knowledge bank
Usefulness of the
28
NOT TO BE intervention
Conclusion
FILLED Content
29 suggestions
Implementation
30 suggestion
Description

First author, along with contact details for the first author or the corresponding author as
mentioned in the paper
APA 6th Citation

Date when extraction is completed

Same as Excel File name: <coder letter><category of intervention><number>

Refer to Sheet 'File Saving Instructions'

Country where the program in the study was conducted

Please use the UNDP 2015 figures for HDI.

For Reference:
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report.pdf (Chapter 1,
Table A1.1, Page 47)

Please use the World Bank 2016 figures for GDP per capita.
For Reference: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD

UNICEF Country statistics for nutrition based on the WHO Standards for stunting,
wasting,underweight,overweight, low birth weight. Use data from 2012 - Only country
level data - no state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from
For reference: https://www.unicef.org/statistics/index_countrystats.html

WHO Anaemia in children under 5 years (% and year of survey) AND Anaemia in pregnant
women (% and year of survey) (Hb <110 g/L). Only country level data - no
state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from.
For reference: http://apps.who.int/nutrition/landscape/report.aspx

UNICEF: MICS data if applicable. Include the Round and summary of child development
indicators from Key Findings - Use data from the latest round available for the entire
country. If data for the entire country is from cycle 3, and later rounds have data only from
one state/part of the country, please use data from cycle 3 as it contains data from the
entire country
Only country level data - no state/district/city data
For Reference: http://mics.unicef.org/surveys - select country through the country filter.

Description of preexisting country-wide or local platform if any - fill in the notes section -
E.g.: alive and thrive, SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition), early learning program of WH

Sector of the intervention - finance, agriculture, social welfare, health etc.

Intervention levels - home based/community based/policy level intervention

° Curriculum details for this intervention (Such as Intervention/s content, curriculum, if

the curriculum is adapted, then the original curriculum, curriculum adaptation, etc.)

° Training for this intervention (Such as Number of days of training, topics of training,
structure of training, strategies of training, type of evaluation (Pre/post), trainer
characteristics (Qualification, experience , etc.))

° Supervision for this intervention (Such as Number of supervision sessions/supervisory

contacts, topics of supervision, documentation of supervision, etc.)

° Delivery agent details (Such as who is delivering, qualification of delivery agent

(education, experience), Incentive given to the agent for delivery of this intervention etc.)
° Behaviour change techniques used in the intervention (Such as provision of information
handouts or sheets; provision of materials such nutrition supplements or toys; problem
solving such as having conversations on how to make food tasty/nutritious; teaching by
doing an activity together such as making complementary foods with/in front of the
mother; use of media such as advertisements, radio shows, street plays etc; use of social
support and assembling communities together)

° Delivery strategy as intended and as actually implemented (Such as location, duration,

frequency of delivery contact, structure of delivery as group or one-on-one, if delivery
strategy is group, then ratio of group: delivery agent as intented and as actually
implemented, etc.)

° If this intervention is integrated in an exisiting platform then provide description for:

(Such as Name of existing service/program, description of services delivered in the
existing program, implementer details, service delivery agent details (Education and
experiencial qualification, training received for the existing intervention/program, pay
received in the existing platform), Additional qualifications for this intervention, training
for this intervention, supervision for this intervention, additional work, aditional
incentives, etc.)
° Information about intended beneficiaries (Such as age, intended indirect beneficiaries,
intended coverage number, intended coverage population description, intended control
group, service/intervention/standard of care received by control group. Also mention
characterisitics of the beneficiaries such as : rural/urban; low ses/high ses, specific
disadvantage group targeted: malnourished/children with disabilities/children with
specific conditions, etc.)

Is the sample that received the intervention representative of the population? (as
explicitly mentioned in the paper: this randomly selected sample is representative of the
population)

Is there equity in the reach of the intervention? ( did the intervention recruit everyone of
the targetted beneficiaries fairly?) as mentioned in the paper

What were the main aims of evlautions?

Who/Which organization funded the evaluation

Who/which organization conducted the evaluation

Describe as mentioned in the paper

° Whether and how fidelity, compliance, quality was assessed.
° The barriers and enablers for implementation
° Key learning for implementation
Cost effectiveness assessed or not, and the result of the same
Describe the strenths of the evaluation

Describe the limitations of the evaluation

Can the results be generalized?

Where can they be generalized? E.g. across the entire country/across entire population
from which sample is drawn from?
Describe as mentioned explicitly in the paper:
° At what level is this program being implemented - e.g. national level, state level, district
level, village level
° What kind of organization is implementing this program (Mention the name of the org as
well) - NGO/Government/Private organization/University/Coalitions and partnerships

° In which platform is this program nested under - Existing Governmental service delivery
platform like government preschool program/ Existing private platform like private school
systems or hospital systems etc. /Existing platform or a service in an NGO setup/a new
platform or service by government/a new platform or service by private sector/ a new
platform or service by NGO

Have the authors expicitly discussed future plans for the program in terms of:
° Replication
° Expansion
° Sustainability
If they have, then please mention page number and paragraph location from the paper

How did this program add to what was already known? Describe both positive and
negative findings

How useful is the program, and in which areas?

Which design suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Which implementation suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Data type

Name

Citation

mm/dd/yyyy

Alphanumeric
al

Name

Number

Number

Number

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
yes/no

yes/no

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Data Entry - Please fill in details for all arms of the intervention
 Item
Heading Subheading Item
No.

1 Author

2 Citation
Data extraction
3 completion date
Extraction Details
4 Extraction code

Country of the
5
program

6 HDI of the
country

GDP per capita of

7 the country

Country level
8 Major child
nutrition indices

Country level
information
Country level
9 Anemia data

Country level
Major Child
10 Development
indices

Major
nutritive/stimulati
11 on initiatives in
the country
12 Sector
13 Delivery platform

Intervention
details (Relevant
pieces on the
14 intervention from
all sections of the
paper)
 Intervention
details (Relevant
pieces on the
14 intervention from
all sections of the
paper)
 Representativene
15 ss in sample

Equity in reach of
16 intervention(s)

17 Aim of evaluation

18 Evaluation Funder

Evaluation
19 Conductor
Evaluation (Please
fill the adjoining
sheet for details on Implementation
the outcomes in 20 evaluation
the study)
21 Cost evaluation
Strengths of
22 evaluation
Limitations of
23 evaluation

Generalisability of
24 results

25 Scale
 25 Scale

26 Sustainability

Addition to
27 knowledge bank
Usefulness of the
28
NOT TO BE intervention
Conclusion
FILLED Content
29 suggestions
Implementation
30 suggestion
Description

First author, along with contact details for the first author or the corresponding author as
mentioned in the paper
APA 6th Citation

Date when extraction is completed

Same as Excel File name: <coder letter><category of intervention><number>

Refer to Sheet 'File Saving Instructions'

Country where the program in the study was conducted

Please use the UNDP 2015 figures for HDI.

For Reference:
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report.pdf (Chapter 1,
Table A1.1, Page 47)

Please use the World Bank 2016 figures for GDP per capita.
For Reference: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD

UNICEF Country statistics for nutrition based on the WHO Standards for stunting,
wasting,underweight,overweight, low birth weight. Use data from 2012 - Only country
level data - no state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from
For reference: https://www.unicef.org/statistics/index_countrystats.html

WHO Anaemia in children under 5 years (% and year of survey) AND Anaemia in pregnant
women (% and year of survey) (Hb <110 g/L). Only country level data - no
state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from.
For reference: http://apps.who.int/nutrition/landscape/report.aspx

UNICEF: MICS data if applicable. Include the Round and summary of child development
indicators from Key Findings - Use data from the latest round available for the entire
country. If data for the entire country is from cycle 3, and later rounds have data only from
one state/part of the country, please use data from cycle 3 as it contains data from the
entire country
Only country level data - no state/district/city data
For Reference: http://mics.unicef.org/surveys - select country through the country filter.

Description of preexisting country-wide or local platform if any - fill in the notes section -
E.g.: alive and thrive, SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition), early learning program of WH

Sector of the intervention - finance, agriculture, social welfare, health etc.

Intervention levels - home based/community based/policy level intervention

° Curriculum details for this intervention (Such as Intervention/s content, curriculum, if

the curriculum is adapted, then the original curriculum, curriculum adaptation, etc.)

° Training for this intervention (Such as Number of days of training, topics of training,
structure of training, strategies of training, type of evaluation (Pre/post), trainer
characteristics (Qualification, experience , etc.))

° Supervision for this intervention (Such as Number of supervision sessions/supervisory

contacts, topics of supervision, documentation of supervision, etc.)

° Delivery agent details (Such as who is delivering, qualification of delivery agent

(education, experience), Incentive given to the agent for delivery of this intervention etc.)
° Behaviour change techniques used in the intervention (Such as provision of information
handouts or sheets; provision of materials such nutrition supplements or toys; problem
solving such as having conversations on how to make food tasty/nutritious; teaching by
doing an activity together such as making complementary foods with/in front of the
mother; use of media such as advertisements, radio shows, street plays etc; use of social
support and assembling communities together)

° Delivery strategy as intended and as actually implemented (Such as location, duration,

frequency of delivery contact, structure of delivery as group or one-on-one, if delivery
strategy is group, then ratio of group: delivery agent as intented and as actually
implemented, etc.)

° If this intervention is integrated in an exisiting platform then provide description for:

(Such as Name of existing service/program, description of services delivered in the
existing program, implementer details, service delivery agent details (Education and
experiencial qualification, training received for the existing intervention/program, pay
received in the existing platform), Additional qualifications for this intervention, training
for this intervention, supervision for this intervention, additional work, aditional
incentives, etc.)
° Information about intended beneficiaries (Such as age, intended indirect beneficiaries,
intended coverage number, intended coverage population description, intended control
group, service/intervention/standard of care received by control group. Also mention
characterisitics of the beneficiaries such as : rural/urban; low ses/high ses, specific
disadvantage group targeted: malnourished/children with disabilities/children with
specific conditions, etc.)

Is the sample that received the intervention representative of the population? (as
explicitly mentioned in the paper: this randomly selected sample is representative of the
population)

Is there equity in the reach of the intervention? ( did the intervention recruit everyone of
the targetted beneficiaries fairly?) as mentioned in the paper

What were the main aims of evlautions?

Who/Which organization funded the evaluation

Who/which organization conducted the evaluation

Describe as mentioned in the paper

° Whether and how fidelity, compliance, quality was assessed.
° The barriers and enablers for implementation
° Key learning for implementation
Cost effectiveness assessed or not, and the result of the same
Describe the strenths of the evaluation

Describe the limitations of the evaluation

Can the results be generalized?

Where can they be generalized? E.g. across the entire country/across entire population
from which sample is drawn from?
Describe as mentioned explicitly in the paper:
° At what level is this program being implemented - e.g. national level, state level, district
level, village level
° What kind of organization is implementing this program (Mention the name of the org as
well) - NGO/Government/Private organization/University/Coalitions and partnerships

° In which platform is this program nested under - Existing Governmental service delivery
platform like government preschool program/ Existing private platform like private school
systems or hospital systems etc. /Existing platform or a service in an NGO setup/a new
platform or service by government/a new platform or service by private sector/ a new
platform or service by NGO

Have the authors expicitly discussed future plans for the program in terms of:
° Replication
° Expansion
° Sustainability
If they have, then please mention page number and paragraph location from the paper

How did this program add to what was already known? Describe both positive and
negative findings

How useful is the program, and in which areas?

Which design suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Which implementation suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Data type

Name

Citation

mm/dd/yyyy

Alphanumeric
al

Name

Number

Number

Number

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
yes/no

yes/no

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Data Entry - Please fill in details for all arms of the intervention
 Inclusion/Exclusion
Design Blinding Sampling Strategy Criteria
Outcome
Evaluation
Please fill out this

Outcome Tool/test Is the test an

(mention if used to adaptation What is the reliability of
primary/seco assess of another Which tool or test the tool used in the
ndary) outcome tool/test is it adapted from paper

Primary
Outcome #1

Primary
Outcome #2

Secondary
Outcome #1

Secondary
Outcome #2
Sample Number recruited Sample attrition Reason for attrition, as mentioned in
at base (%) the paper

Please fill out this table for all outcomes with information as mentioned in the pap

What is the
What is the frequency of location of
measurement measurement Who conducts the measurement
mation as mentioned in the paper
Result in brief (Raw and
adjusted) (e.g. Without Effect Size (if not
adjusting, the raw OR was x, Effect size (if mentioned mentioned in the paper
after adjusting the OR was explicitly in the and calculated by the
y) P value paper/tables) coder)
Adjusted variables (e.g.
age, sex, maternal
education etc.)
 Inclusion/Exclusion
Design Blinding Sampling Strategy Criteria
Outcome
Evaluation
Please fill out this tab

Outcome Tool/test Is the test an

(mention if used to adaptation What is the reliability
primary/seco assess of another Which tool or test of the tool used in the
ndary) outcome tool/test is it adapted from paper

Primary
Outcome #1

Primary
Outcome #2

Secondary
Outcome #1

Secondary
Outcome #2
Sample Number Reason for attrition, as
recruited at base Sample attrition (%) mentioned in the paper

Please fill out this table for all outcomes with information as mentioned in the paper

What is the frequency What is the location of Who conducts the

of measurement measurement measurement
ormation as mentioned in the paper
Result in brief (Raw and
adjusted) (e.g. Without Effect Size (if not
adjusting, the raw OR was Effect size (if mentioned mentioned in the paper
x, after adjusting the OR explicitly in the and calculated by the
was y) P value paper/tables) coder)
Adjusted variables (e.g.
age, sex, maternal
education etc.)
 Human
Developm Life Expected
ent Index expectanc years of
(HDI) y at birth schooling
HDI rank Country Value (years) (years)
2015 2015 2015
VERY HIGH HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
1 Norway 0.949 81.7 17.7
2 Australia 0.939 82.5 20.4
2 Switzerland 0.939 83.1 16.0
4 Germany 0.926 81.1 17.1
5 Denmark 0.925 80.4 19.2
5 Singapore 0.925 83.2 15.4
7 Netherlands 0.924 81.7 18.1
8 Ireland 0.923 81.1 18.6
9 Iceland 0.921 82.7 19.0
10 Canada 0.920 82.2 16.3

10 United States 0.920 79.2 16.5

Hong Kong,
12 China (SAR) 0.917 84.2 15.7

13 New Zealand 0.915 82.0 19.2

14 Sweden 0.913 82.3 16.1

15 Liechtenstein 0.912 80.2 g

14.6
United
16 Kingdom 0.909 80.8 16.3
17 Japan 0.903 83.7 15.3

Korea
18 (Republic of) 0.901 82.1 16.6
19 Israel 0.899 82.6 16.0

20 Luxembourg 0.898 81.9 13.9

21 France 0.897 82.4 16.3
22 Belgium 0.896 81.0 16.6
23 Finland 0.895 81.0 17.0
24 Austria 0.893 81.6 15.9
25 Slovenia 0.890 80.6 17.3
26 Italy 0.887 83.3 16.3
27 Spain 0.884 82.8 17.7
Czech
28 Republic 0.878 78.8 16.8
29 Greece 0.866 81.1 17.2
Brunei
30 Darussalam 0.865 79.0 14.9
30 Estonia 0.865 77.0 16.5
32 Andorra 0.858 81.5 g
13.5
33 Cyprus 0.856 80.3 14.3
33 Malta 0.856 80.7 14.6
33 Qatar 0.856 78.3 13.4
36 Poland 0.855 77.6 16.4
37 Lithuania 0.848 73.5 16.5
38 Chile 0.847 82.0 16.3

38 Saudi Arabia 0.847 74.4 16.1

40 Slovakia 0.845 76.4 15.0
41 Portugal 0.843 81.2 16.6
United Arab
42 Emirates 0.840 77.1 13.3
43 Hungary 0.836 75.3 15.6
44 Latvia 0.830 74.3 16.0
45 Argentina 0.827 76.5 17.3
45 Croatia 0.827 77.5 15.3
47 Bahrain 0.824 76.7 14.5
48 Montenegro 0.807 76.4 15.1
Russian
49 Federation 0.804 70.3 15.0
50 Romania 0.802 74.8 14.7
51 Kuwait 0.800 74.5 13.3
HIGH HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
52 Belarus 0.796 71.5 15.7
52 Oman 0.796 77.0 13.7
54 Barbados 0.795 75.8 15.3
54 Uruguay 0.795 77.4 15.5
56 Bulgaria 0.794 74.3 15.0
56 Kazakhstan 0.794 69.6 15.0
58 Bahamas 0.792 75.6 12.7
59 Malaysia 0.789 74.9 13.1
60 Palau 0.788 72.9 g
14.3
60 Panama 0.788 77.8 13.0
Antigua and
62 Barbuda 0.786 76.2 13.9
63 Seychelles 0.782 73.3 14.1
64 Mauritius 0.781 74.6 15.2
Trinidad and
65 Tobago 0.780 70.5 12.7
66 Costa Rica 0.776 79.6 14.2
66 Serbia 0.776 75.0 14.4
68 Cuba 0.775 79.6 13.9
Iran (Islamic
69 Republic of) 0.774 75.6 14.8
70 Georgia 0.769 75.0 13.9
71 Turkey 0.767 75.5 14.6
Venezuela
(Bolivarian
71 Republic of) 0.767 74.4 14.3
73 Sri Lanka 0.766 75.0 14.0
Saint Kitts
74 and Nevis 0.765 74.0 g
13.7
75 Albania 0.764 78.0 14.2
76 Lebanon 0.763 79.5 13.3
77 Mexico 0.762 77.0 13.3
78 Azerbaijan 0.759 70.9 12.7
79 Brazil 0.754 74.7 15.2
79 Grenada 0.754 73.6 15.8

Bosnia and
81 Herzegovina 0.750 76.6 14.2
The former
Yugoslav
Republic of
82 Macedonia 0.748 75.5 12.9
83 Algeria 0.745 75.0 14.4
84 Armenia 0.743 74.9 12.7
84 Ukraine 0.743 71.1 15.3
86 Jordan 0.741 74.2 13.1
87 Peru 0.740 74.8 13.4
87 Thailand 0.740 74.6 13.6
89 Ecuador 0.739 76.1 14.0
90 China 0.738 76.0 13.5
91 Fiji 0.736 70.2 15.3
92 Mongolia 0.735 69.8 14.8
92 Saint Lucia 0.735 75.2 13.1
94 Jamaica 0.730 75.8 12.8
95 Colombia 0.727 74.2 13.6
96 Dominica 0.726 77.9 g
12.8
97 Suriname 0.725 71.3 12.7
97 Tunisia 0.725 75.0 14.6
Dominican
99 Republic 0.722 73.7 13.2

Saint Vincent
and the
99 Grenadines 0.722 73.0 13.3
101 Tonga 0.721 73.0 14.3
102 Libya 0.716 71.8 13.4
103 Belize 0.706 70.1 12.8
104 Samoa 0.704 73.7 12.9
105 Maldives 0.701 77.0 12.7
105 Uzbekistan 0.701 69.4 r
12.2
MEDIUM HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

Moldova
107 (Republic of) 0.699 71.7 11.8
108 Botswana 0.698 64.5 12.6
109 Gabon 0.697 64.9 12.6
110 Paraguay 0.693 73.0 12.3
111 Egypt 0.691 71.3 13.1

111 Turkmenistan 0.691 65.7 10.8

113 Indonesia 0.689 69.1 12.9
Palestine,
114 State of 0.684 73.1 12.8
115 Viet Nam 0.683 75.9 12.6
116 Philippines 0.682 68.3 11.7
117 El Salvador 0.680 73.3 13.2
 Bolivia
(Plurinational
118 State of) 0.674 68.7 13.8
119 South Africa 0.666 57.7 13.0
120 Kyrgyzstan 0.664 70.8 13.0
121 Iraq 0.649 69.6 10.1
122 Cabo Verde 0.648 73.5 13.5
123 Morocco 0.647 74.3 12.1
124 Nicaragua 0.645 75.2 11.7
125 Guatemala 0.640 72.1 10.7
125 Namibia 0.640 65.1 11.7
127 Guyana 0.638 66.5 10.3
Micronesia
(Federated
127 States of) 0.638 69.3 11.7
129 Tajikistan 0.627 69.6 11.3
130 Honduras 0.625 73.3 11.2
131 India 0.624 68.3 11.7
132 Bhutan 0.607 69.9 12.5
133 Timor-Leste 0.605 68.5 12.5
134 Vanuatu 0.597 72.1 10.8
135 Congo 0.592 62.9 11.1
Equatorial
135 Guinea 0.592 57.9 9.2
137 Kiribati 0.588 66.2 11.9

Lao People's
Democratic
138 Republic 0.586 66.6 10.8
139 Bangladesh 0.579 72.0 10.2
139 Ghana 0.579 61.5 11.5
139 Zambia 0.579 60.8 12.5

Sao Tome
142 and Principe 0.574 66.6 12.0
143 Cambodia 0.563 68.8 10.9
144 Nepal 0.558 70.0 12.2
145 Myanmar 0.556 66.1 9.1
146 Kenya 0.555 62.2 11.1
147 Pakistan 0.550 66.4 8.1
 LOW HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
148 Swaziland 0.541 48.9 11.4
Syrian Arab
149 Republic 0.536 69.7 9.0
150 Angola 0.533 52.7 11.4
Tanzania
(United
151 Republic of) 0.531 65.5 8.9
152 Nigeria 0.527 53.1 10.0
153 Cameroon 0.518 56.0 10.4
Papua New
154 Guinea 0.516 62.8 9.9
154 Zimbabwe 0.516 59.2 10.3
Solomon
156 Islands 0.515 68.1 9.6
157 Mauritania 0.513 63.2 8.5
158 Madagascar 0.512 65.5 10.3
159 Rwanda 0.498 64.7 10.8
160 Comoros 0.497 63.6 11.1
160 Lesotho 0.497 50.1 10.7
162 Senegal 0.494 66.9 9.5
163 Haiti 0.493 63.1 9.1
163 Uganda 0.493 59.2 10.0
165 Sudan 0.490 63.7 7.2
166 Togo 0.487 60.2 12.0
167 Benin 0.485 59.8 10.7
168 Yemen 0.482 64.1 9.0
169 Afghanistan 0.479 60.7 10.1
170 Malawi 0.476 63.9 10.8
171 Côte d'Ivoire 0.474 51.9 8.9
172 Djibouti 0.473 62.3 6.3
173 Gambia 0.452 60.5 8.9
174 Ethiopia 0.448 64.6 8.4
175 Mali 0.442 58.5 8.4
Congo
(Democratic
Republic of
176 the) 0.435 59.1 9.8
177 Liberia 0.427 61.2 9.9
 Guinea-
178 Bissau 0.424 55.5 9.2
179 Eritrea 0.420 64.2 5.0

179 Sierra Leone 0.420 51.3 9.5

181 Mozambique 0.418 55.5 9.1

181 South Sudan 0.418 56.1 4.9

183 Guinea 0.414 59.2 8.8
184 Burundi 0.404 57.1 10.6

185 Burkina Faso 0.402 59.0 7.7

186 Chad 0.396 51.9 7.3
187 Niger 0.353 61.9 5.4
Central
African
188 Republic 0.352 51.5 7.1
OTHER COUNTRIES OR TERRITORIES
Korea
(Democratic
People's
Rep. of) .. 70.5 12.0
Marshall
Islands .. .. ..
Monaco .. .. ..
Nauru .. .. 9.7
San Marino .. .. 15.1
Somalia .. 55.7 ..
Tuvalu .. .. ..

Human
developmen
t groups

Very high
human
development 0.892 79.4 16.4

High human
development 0.746 75.5 13.8
Medium
human
development 0.631 68.6 11.5

Low human
development 0.497 59.3 9.3

Developing
countries 0.668 70.0 11.8

Regions
Arab States 0.687 70.8 11.7
East Asia
and the
Pacific 0.720 74.2 13.0
Europe and
Central Asia 0.756 72.6 13.9
Latin
America and
the
Caribbean 0.751 75.2 14.1
South Asia 0.621 68.7 11.3

Sub-Saharan
Africa 0.523 58.9 9.7

Least
developed
countries 0.508 63.6 9.4

Small island
developing
states 0.667 70.3 11.5

Organisatio
n for
Economic
Co-
operation
and
Developmen
t 0.887 80.3 15.9
World 0.717 71.6 12.3

Notes

a. Data refer
to 2015 or
the most
recent year
available.

b. In
calculating
the HDI
value,
expected
years of
schooling is
capped at 18
years.

c. Updated
by HDRO
using Barro
and Lee
(2016)
estimates.

d. Based on
data from the
national
statistical
office.

e. In
calculating
the HDI
value, GNI
per capita is
capped at
$75,000.
f. Based on
Barro and
Lee (2016).

g. Value from
UNDESA
(2011).
h. Calculated
as the
average of
mean years
of schooling
for Austria
and
Switzerland.

i. Estimated
using the
purchasing
power parity
(PPP) rate
and
projected
growth rate
of
Switzerland.

j. Estimated
using the
PPP rate and
projected
growth rate
of Spain.

k. Based on
cross-country
regression.

l. HDRO
estimate
based on
data from
World Bank
(2016a) and
United
Nations
Statistics
Division
(2016a)
m. Updated
by HDRO
based on
data from
UNESCO
Institute for
Statistics
(2016).

n. Based on
data from
United
Nations
Children’s
Fund
(UNICEF)
Multiple
Indicator
Cluster
Surveys for
2006–2015.

o. Updated
by HDRO
based on
data from
ICF Macro
Demographic
and Health
Surveys for
2006-2015.

p. Based on
a cross-
country
regression
and the
projected
growth rate
from
UNECLAC
(2016).
q. Based on
data from
ICF Macro
Demographic
and Health
Surveys for
2006-2015.

r. Value from
WHO (2016).

s. Updated
by HDRO
based on
Syrian
Center for
Policy
Research
(2016).

t. Based on
projected
growth rates
from
UNESCWA
(2016) and
World Bank
(2016a).

Definitions
knowledge and a decent standard of living. See Technical note 1 at http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/fil
calculated.
Life expectancy at birth: Number of years a newborn infant could expect to live if prevailing patterns
throughout the infant’s
Expected years life.
of schooling: Number of years of schooling that a child of school entrance age can
rates
Mean years of schooling: Averagelife.
persist throughout the child’s number of years of education received by people ages 25 and o
durations of each level.
Gross national income (GNI) per capita: Aggregate income of an economy generated by its produc
paid for the
GNI per use rank
capita of factors
minus of HDI
production owned by the
rank: Difference rest of by
in ranking theGNI
world,
perconverted
capita andtoby
international
HDI value. doll
An
by HDI value.
HDI rank for 2014: Ranking by HDI value for 2014, which was calculated using the same most recen
values for 2015.

Main data
sources
Columns 1
and 7: HDRO
calculations
based on
data from
UNDESA
(2015a),
UNESCO
Institute for
Statistics
(2016),
United
Nations
Statistica
Division
(2016a),
World Bank
(2016a),
Barro and
Lee (2016)
and IMF
(2016).
Column 2:
UNDESA
(2015a).

Column 3:
UNESCO
Institute for
Statistics
(2016), ICF
Macro
Demographic
and Health
Surveys and
UNICEF
Multple
Indicator
Cluster
Surveys.
Column 4:
UNESCO
Institute for
Statistics
(2016), Barro
and Lee
(2016), ICF
Macro
Demographic
and Health
Surveys and
UNICEF's
Multple
Indicator
Cluster
Surveys.

Column 5:
World Bank
(2016a), IMF
(2016) and
United
Nations
Statistica
Division
(2016a).

Column 6:
Calculated
based on
data in
columns 1
and 5.
 Gross GNI per
national capita
Mean income rank
years of (GNI) per minus HDI
schooling capita rank
(years) (2011 PPP $)
a
2015 a
2015 2015

12.7 67,614 5
b
13.2 42,822 19
13.4 56,364 7
13.2 c
45,000 13
b
12.7 44,519 13
d
11.6 78,162 e
-3
b
11.9 46,326 8
b
12.3 43,798 11
b
12.2 c
37,065 20
13.1 f
42,582 12

13.2 53,245 1

11.6 54,265 -2

b
12.5 32,870 20
12.3 46,251 2

12.4 h
75,065 e,i
-11

13.3 37,931 10
12.5 c
37,268 10

12.2 34,541 12
12.8 31,215 16

12.0 62,471 -12

11.6 38,085 4
11.4 41,243 1
11.2 f
38,868 1
 11.3 c
43,609 -4
12.1 28,664 13
10.9 33,573 6
9.8 32,779 7

12.3 28,144 11
10.5 24,808 16

9.0 f
72,843 -25
12.5 c
26,362 12
d
10.3 47,979 j
-18
11.7 29,459 4
11.3 29,500 3
9.8 129,916 e
-32
11.9 24,117 11
12.7 26,006 7
9.9 21,665 16

9.6 51,320 -26

12.2 26,764 1
8.9 26,104 2

k
9.5 c
66,203 -35
12.0 23,394 6
11.7 f
22,589 7
9.9 f
20,945 l
12
11.2 20,291 14
k
9.4 m
37,236 -19
11.3 n
15,410 24

12.0 23,286 1
10.8 19,428 11
7.3 76,075 e
-48

12.0 15,629 19
8.1 m
34,402 -21
10.5 n
14,952 20
8.6 19,148 8
10.8 c
16,261 13
11.7 f
22,093 -3
k
10.9 21,565 -3
10.1 24,620 -13
12.3 k
13,771 21
9.9 19,470 0

9.2 k
20,907 -4
9.4 k
23,886 -15
9.1 17,948 1

o
10.9 28,049 -25
8.7 14,006 14
10.8 12,202 22
11.8 m
7,455 p
48

8.8 f
16,395 -2
12.2 8,856 38
7.9 18,705 -7

9.4 15,129 2
10.9 f
10,789 21

8.4 k
22,436 -22
9.6 10,252 24
8.6 m
13,312 8
8.6 16,383 -9
11.2 16,413 -12
7.8 14,145 -1
8.6 k
11,502 13

9.0 10,091 22

9.4 n
12,405 5
7.8 c
13,533 -1
11.3 8,189 28
11.3 f
7,361 34
10.1 10,111 15
9.0 11,295 6
 7.9 14,519 -11
8.3 10,536 6
7.6 c
13,345 -7
k
10.5 f
8,245 20
9.8 m
10,449 4
9.3 m
9,791 14
9.6 f
8,350 16
7.6 c
12,762 -10
k
7.9 m
10,096 6
8.3 m
16,018 -27
7.1 c
10,249 3

7.7 12,756 -13

m
8.6 k
10,372 -1
m
11.1 5,284 33
k
7.3 c
14,303 -25
10.5 7,375 14
d
10.3 d
5,372 27
o
6.2 q
10,383 -8
12.0 m
5,748 21

11.9 5,026 31
9.2 c
14,663 -33
8.1 q
19,044 -46
8.1 8,182 3
7.1 f
10,064 -7

9.9 k
14,026 -32
7.9 10,053 -8

8.9 5,256 21
8.0 c
5,335 18
9.3 8,395 -7
6.5 7,732 -3
 8.2 6,155 6
10.3 12,087 -30
10.8 c
3,097 32
k
6.6 n
11,608 -30
4.8 k
6,049 3
5.0 f
7,195 -4
6.5 f
4,747 16
6.3 7,063 -4
6.7 f
9,770 -18
8.4 c
6,884 -5

k
9.7 d
3,291 22
10.4 q
2,601 30
6.2 4,466 11
6.3 c
5,663 -4
3.1 n
7,081 -12
4.4 q
5,371 l
-1
o
6.8 n
2,805 23
6.3 c
5,503 -7

k
5.5 q
21,517 -79
7.8 k
2,475 23

5.2 n
5,049 -2
5.2 c
3,341 8
6.9 f
3,839 5
6.9 f
3,464 7

5.3 3,070 12
4.7 q
3,095 10
4.1 n
2,337 19
m
4.7 f
4,943 -6
6.3 f
2,881 10
5.1 5,031 -10
 6.8 n
7,522 -33

5.1 s
2,441 t
13
5.0 q
6,291 -27

5.8 2,467 10
6.0 q
5,443 -23
6.1 c
2,894 2

k
4.3 f
2,712 4
7.7 1,588 20

m
5.3 d
1,561 19
4.3 f
3,527 -12
6.1 n
1,320 25
3.8 1,617 14
4.8 q
1,335 22
6.1 f
3,319 -12
2.8 m
2,250 3
k
5.2 c
1,657 9
5.7 m
1,670 8
3.5 3,846 -22
4.7 q
1,262 18
3.5 c
1,979 1
3.0 c
2,300 -4
3.6 f
1,871 1
4.4 f
1,073 16
5.0 f
3,163 -20
4.1 k
3,216 -22
3.3 f
1,541 3
2.6 q
1,523 5
2.3 2,218 -9

6.1 680 15
4.4 f
683 13
m
2.9 k
1,369 3
3.9 k
1,490 1

3.3 f
1,529 -1

3.5 q
1,098 4

4.8 n
1,882 -12
2.6 q
1,058 4
3.0 c
691 5

1.4 q
1,537 -8
2.3 n
1,991 -19
1.7 f
889 1

4.2 n
587 4

.. .. ..

.. 4,412 ..
.. .. ..
k
.. 12,058 ..
.. 50,063 ..
.. 294 ..
.. 5,395 ..

12.2 39,605 —

8.1 13,844 —
6.6 6,281 —

4.6 2,649 —

7.2 9,257 —

6.8 14,958 —

7.7 12,125 —

10.3 12,862 —

8.3 14,028 —
6.2 5,799 —

5.4 3,383 —

4.4 2,385 —

8.1 7,303 —

11.9 37,916 —
8.3 14,447 —
 /hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2016_technical_notes.pdf for details on how the HDI is
ct to live if prevailing patterns of age-specific mortality rates at the time of birth stay the same
d of school entrance age can expect to receive if prevailing patterns of age-specific enrolment
ed by people ages 25 and older, converted from education attainment levels using official
omy generated by its production and its ownership of factors of production, less the incomes
capita andtoby
onverted international
HDI value. dollars using
A negative PPPmeans
value rates, that
divided
the by midyear
country population.
is better ranked by GNI than
d using the same most recently revised data available in 2016 that were used to calculate HDI
HDI rank

2014

1
3
2
4
6
4
6
8
9
9

11

12

13
15

14

16
17

18
19

20
22
21
23
24
25
27
26

28
29

30
31
32
34
35
33
36
37
38

38
40
41

42
43
44
45
46
46
49

48
51
50

51
53
54
54
57
56
58
59
62
60

61
63
64

64
66
66
69

68
71
72

70
72

75
75
74
77
77
79
80

82

83
84
85
81
85
89
88
87
91
91
93
90
94
95
95
97
97

101

99
101
100
103
104
105
108

105
107
109
110
111

111
113

115
115
114
115
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
126
126
125

126
129
130
131
132
133
134
135

137
136

137
140
140
139

142
143
144
146
147
148
149

145
150

152
151
154

153
158

155
155
157
162
160
161
163
164
165
165
167
168
159
169
170
172
171
173
174
175

178
177
179
181

176

182

179
182
184

185
186
187

188

..

..
..
..
..
..
..

—
—

—
—

—
—
Data Source
Last Updated Date

GDP per capita in USD

Country Name 2016
Aruba
Afghanistan 561.7787462695
Angola 3110.8081826301
Albania 4146.896250462
Andorra
Arab World 6153.0695472879
United Arab Emirates 37622.2074575932
Argentina 12449.2168521177
Armenia 3606.1520571515
American Samoa
Antigua and Barbuda 14353.3788138742
Australia 49927.8195094751
Austria 44176.5152160475
Azerbaijan 3876.9364326427
Burundi 285.7274420647
Belgium 41096.1573021536
Benin 789.4404106856
Burkina Faso 649.7304836558
Bangladesh 1358.7797522498
Bulgaria 7350.7958008981
Bahrain 22354.1670706869
Bahamas, The 23124.3865532472
Bosnia and Herzegovina 4708.7182606562
Belarus 4989.2546105641
Belize 4810.5659019932
Bermuda
Bolivia 3104.956089141
Brazil 8649.9484917506
Barbados 16096.8925879661
Brunei Darussalam 26938.5033823025
Bhutan 2804.0002229857
Botswana 6788.0427453757
Central African Republic 382.2131743177
Canada 42157.9279910146
Central Europe and the Baltics 12657.3868037068
Switzerland 78812.6506872985
Channel Islands
Chile 13792.9260543892
China 8123.1808725464
Cote d'Ivoire 1526.1971748425
Cameroon 1032.6487220445
Congo, Dem. Rep. 444.5053168155
Congo, Rep. 1528.2448301246
Colombia 5805.6053345246
Comoros 775.0800847048
Cabo Verde 2997.7526795353
Costa Rica 11824.6381020004
Caribbean small states 8769.6416493072
Cuba
Curacao
Cayman Islands
Cyprus 23324.2017353618
Czech Republic 18266.5496886036
Germany 41936.0585754956
Djibouti
Dominica 7144.4546727765
Denmark 53417.6642756422
Dominican Republic 6722.2235358061
Algeria 3843.7523220231
East Asia & Pacific (excluding high income) 6586.0777441624
Early-demographic dividend 3240.7245154111
East Asia & Pacific 9786.4681430282
Europe & Central Asia (excluding high income) 7136.9012977134
Europe & Central Asia 22108.5112817638
Ecuador 5968.9841384851
Egypt, Arab Rep. 3514.4900968881
Euro area 34866.0960709045
Eritrea
Spain 26528.4917900799
Estonia 17574.6873552714
Ethiopia 706.7577540781
European Union 32058.7735845667
Fragile and conflict affected situations 1471.0146505076
Finland 43090.2475062997
Fiji 5153.3515443166
France 36854.9682804756
Faroe Islands
Micronesia, Fed. Sts. 3068.5077713295
Gabon 7179.3406611531
United Kingdom 39899.3883948894
Georgia 3853.6499035292
Ghana 1513.4610343275
Gibraltar
Guinea 508.1450784273
Gambia, The 473.1904362742
Guinea-Bissau 620.2147647436
Equatorial Guinea 8333.23826312
Greece 18103.9693224025
Grenada 9469.2191806966
Greenland
Guatemala 4146.7441286273
Guam
Guyana 4456.5536973549
High income 40677.6835231725
Hong Kong SAR, China 43681.1405799513
Honduras 2361.157619509
Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) 861.5101555247
Croatia 12090.6665635703
Haiti 739.5954362537
Hungary 12664.8474351203
IBRD only 5498.8246744243
IDA & IBRD total 4435.5083442698
IDA total 1268.1016807117
IDA blend 1754.2046131236
Indonesia 3570.2948881177
IDA only 1023.473320085
Isle of Man
India 1709.387921198
Not classified
Ireland 61606.482939417
Iran, Islamic Rep.
Iraq 4609.6006935232
Iceland 59976.9425653312
Israel 37292.6122172917
Italy 30527.2682030287
Jamaica 4868.2482626075
Jordan 4087.9375167203
Japan 38894.4677292018
Kazakhstan 7510.077208658
Kenya 1455.3597653647
Kyrgyz Republic 1077.0361743348
Cambodia 1269.9072381891
Kiribati 1449.0582311679
St. Kitts and Nevis 16725.2796474992
Korea, Rep. 27538.8061282212
Kuwait
Latin America & Caribbean (excluding high income) 7803.4276235546
Lao PDR 2353.1528746509
Lebanon 7914.0046774839
Liberia 455.370741357
Libya
St. Lucia 7744.4451726394
Latin America & Caribbean 8156.5907376669
Least developed countries: UN classification 960.0742711288
Low income 615.0728016683
Liechtenstein
Sri Lanka 3835.3948171134
Lower middle income 2075.1417499863
Low & middle income 4336.9097231009
Lesotho 998.1343715576
Late-demographic dividend 8144.6457804724
Lithuania 14879.6802989698
Luxembourg 102831.321482811
Latvia 14118.0639067571
Macao SAR, China 73186.9601431088
St. Martin (French part)
Morocco 2832.4297771362
Monaco
Moldova 1900.201479348
Madagascar 401.318870069
Maldives 8601.6324883815
Middle East & North Africa 7124.6885733848
Mexico 8201.3062528823
Marshall Islands 3448.5357856255
Middle income 4781.4203766755
Macedonia, FYR 5237.1476704612
Mali 780.5071108745
Malta 25058.1706055815
Myanmar 1275.0176081484
Middle East & North Africa (excluding high income)
Montenegro 6701.0000802424
Mongolia 3686.4516981052
Northern Mariana Islands
Mozambique 382.0693304256
Mauritania 1077.5561362616
Mauritius 9627.5957852235
Malawi 300.7948251131
Malaysia 9502.5683962517
North America 55927.8558946185
Namibia 4140.461932488
New Caledonia
Niger 363.2269738899
Nigeria 2177.9851698184
Nicaragua 2151.3820465635
Netherlands 45294.7799953866
Norway 70812.4774226187
Nepal 729.5325011332
Nauru 7821.298917699
New Zealand 39426.6234987649
OECD members 36741.3610815405
Oman 14982.3579235229
Other small states 11965.5609054918
Pakistan 1468.1929464781
Panama 13680.23600692
Peru 6045.6500766247
Philippines 2951.0719290354
Palau 13626.0056736269
Papua New Guinea
Poland 12372.4170564311
Pre-demographic dividend 1358.7514903267
Puerto Rico
Korea, Dem. People’s Rep.
Portugal 19813.3082485256
Paraguay 4080.2046439444
West Bank and Gaza 2943.4045337363
Pacific island small states 3720.7366314306
Post-demographic dividend 40873.1947336663
French Polynesia
Qatar 59330.8599872525
Romania 9474.1306044054
Russian Federation 8748.3645040545
Rwanda 702.8356015857
South Asia 1639.7122590052
Saudi Arabia 20028.6482072005
Sudan 2415.0381621256
Senegal 958.0737378526
Singapore 52960.7141893889
Solomon Islands 2005.483643328
Sierra Leone 496.0494633505
El Salvador 4223.5845794347
San Marino
Somalia 434.2088096686
Serbia 5348.2940642138
Sub-Saharan Africa (excluding high income) 1448.7478186628
South Sudan
Sub-Saharan Africa 1449.9973575632
Small states 10883.0928113459
Sao Tome and Principe 1756.0614700482
Suriname 6484.4327310953
Slovak Republic 16495.9876837228
Slovenia 21304.5701619503
Sweden 51599.868867777
Swaziland 2775.1539084818
Sint Maarten (Dutch part)
Seychelles 15075.7194365696
Syrian Arab Republic
Turks and Caicos Islands
Chad 664.2956518993
East Asia & Pacific (IDA & IBRD countries) 6655.8457966614
Europe & Central Asia (IDA & IBRD countries) 7573.1976625772
Togo 578.4616936486
Thailand 5907.9134315153
Tajikistan 795.8438643675
Turkmenistan 6389.3341427962

Latin America & the Caribbean (IDA & IBRD countries) 8044.1492837783
Timor-Leste
Middle East & North Africa (IDA & IBRD countries)
Tonga 3688.8746359459
South Asia (IDA & IBRD) 1639.7122590052
Sub-Saharan Africa (IDA & IBRD countries) 1449.9973575632
Trinidad and Tobago 15377.0988055665
Tunisia 3688.6463746808
Turkey 10787.609339044
Tuvalu 3083.6152508862
Tanzania 879.1938140263
Uganda 615.3088031825
Ukraine 2185.7280306644
Upper middle income 7937.2882092559
Uruguay 15220.5660250684
United States 57466.7871132348
Uzbekistan 2110.6478723951
St. Vincent and the Grenadines 7030.0571450577
Venezuela, RB
British Virgin Islands
Virgin Islands (U.S.)
Vietnam 2185.6902824641
Vanuatu 2860.5664748323
World 10150.7882814935
Samoa 4027.7613703455
Kosovo 3661.4298474226
Yemen, Rep. 990.3347739546
South Africa 5273.5938796846
Zambia 1178.387905012
Zimbabwe 1008.5973305119