Supporting Information Appendix S2: Information relating to our

multivariate normality diagnostics for our multivariate response multilevel model for WAZ and HAZ, and WAZ, HAZ and WHZ scores.

Assessing multivariate normality assumption in household (Level 2) and child (Level 1) residuals for WAZ and HAZ scores.

Figure 7.1 Multivariate normality plot for WAZ and HAZ scores.

Note: The multivariate normality assumption approximately passed when WAZ and HAZ scores were jointly modelled.

159

Assessing multivariate normality assumption in household (Level 2) and child-level (Level 1) residuals for WAZ, HAZ and WHZ scores.

Figure 7.2 Multivariate normality plot for WAZ, HAZ and WHZ scores

Note: The multivariate normality assumption failed when WAZ, HAZ and WHZ scores were jointly modelled.

160

7.7 Annex 1: STROBE checklist Title and abstract

1a. Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term in the title or the abstract

This has been done in abstract subsections. The study was a cross sectional population based study.

1b. Provide in the abstract an informative and balanced summary of what was done and what was found

This has been done (page 140). Introduction

2. Background/rationale. Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation being reported

This has been done. See pages 142-143.

3. Objectives. State specific objectives, including any prespecified hypotheses

This has been done. See paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 at page 143. Methods

4. Study design. Present key elements of study design early in the paper

This has been done in the subsection “study population” (page 144)

5. Setting. Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up, and data collection

This has been done in the subsection “study population” (page 144)

6. Participants. Cross sectional study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants

This has been done in the subsection “study population” (page 144)

7. Variables. Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. Give diagnostic criteria, if applicable

This has been done in the subsections “outcome variables” (page 145) and “explanatory variables” (page 145 and page 158 in Table 7.4)

8. Data source/measurements. For each variable of interest, give sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement). Describe comparability of assessment methods if there is more than one group

Source of possible bias have been described in the subsection “study population” (page 144) detailing missingness in observations and have been stressed in study limitations (page 154, paragraph 2).

10. Study size. Explain how the study size was arrived at

This has been done in the subsection “study population” (page 144).

11. Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen and why

This has been done in the subsection “statistical analysis” (see pages 145-146).

12. Statistical methods (a-e).

161 Results

13. (a) Report numbers of individuals at each stage of study—eg numbers potentially eligible, examined for eligibility, confirmed eligible, included in the study, completing follow-up, and analysed. (b) Give reasons for non-participation at each stage(c) Consider use of a flow diagram

This has been done in the section “results” (page 148). Flow diagram was not necessary because it was a one step cross sectional study.

14. Descriptive data. (a) Give characteristics of study participants (eg demographic, clinical, social) and information on exposures and potential confounders (b) Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest (c) Cohort study—Summarise follow-up time (eg average and total amount)

This has been done (see page 148). Follow-up time was not described because of the cross sectional nature of the study.

15. Outcome data. Cross sectional study—Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures

Summary measure of outcomes has been discussed at each specific point.

16. Main results. (a) Report the numbers of individuals at each stage of the study—eg numbers potentially eligible, examined for eligibility, confirmed eligible, included in the study, completing follow-up, and analysed (b) Give reasons for non-participation at each stage (c) Consider use of a flow diagram

This has been included in results and tables. Flow diagram was not necessary because it was a onetime cross sectional study.

17. Other analyses. Report other analyses done—eg analyses of subgroups and interactions, and sensitivity analyses

No other analysis has been done. Discussion

18. Key results. Summarise key results with reference to study objectives

Key results have been summarised (see pages 152-153).

19. Limitations. Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias

Limitations have been discussed at page 154, paragraph 2.

20. Interpretation. Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence

A cautious interpretation considering other studies has been done (see pages 154-157). 21. Generalisability. Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of the study results Generalisability has been discussed at each specific point.

Other information

22. Funding. Give the source of funding and the role of the funders for the present study and, if applicable, for the original study on which the present article is based

162

References

Adekanmbi, V. T., G. A. Kayode, and O. A. Uthman (2013). Individual and contextual factors associated with childhood stunting in Nigeria: a multilevel analysis: Maternal and Child Nutrition, v. 9, p. 244-59.

Aheto, J. M. K., T. J. Keegan, B. M. Taylor, and P. J. Diggle (2015). Childhood Malnutrition and Its Determinants among Under-Five Children in Ghana, Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, p. 552-561.

Alom, J., M. A. Quddus, and M. A. Islam (2012). Nutritional status of under-five children in Bangladesh: a multilevel analysis: J Biosoc Sci, v. 44, p. 525-35. Antwi, S. (2008). Malnutrition: missed opportunities for diagnosis: Ghana Medical

Journal, v. 42, p. 101-104.

Babatunde, R. O., F. I. Olagunju, S. B. Fakayode, and F. E. Sola-Ojo (2011). Prevalence and Determinants of Malnutrition among Under-five Children of Farming

Households in Kwara State, Nigeria: Journal of Agricultural Science, v. 3, p. 173-181.

Bloss, E., F. Wainaina, and R. Bailey (2004). Prevalence and Predictors of

Underweight, Stunting, and Wasting among Children Aged 5 and Under in Western Kenya: Journal of Tropical Pediatrics, v. 50, p. 260-270.

Bomela, N. J. (2009). Social, economic, health and environmental determinants of child nutritional status in three Central Asian Republics: Public Health Nutr, v. 12, p. 1871-7.

de Onis, M., and M. Blössner (1997). WHO Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition, Geneva, WHO.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2009). Nutrition Country Profiles-Ghana. [last accessed May 2015] (http://www.fao.org/ag/AGN/nutrition/gha_en.stm), Rome, FAO, United Nations.

Ghana Statistical Service, Ghana Health Service, and ICF Macro (2009). Ghana Demographic and Health Survey 2008, Accra, Ghana., GSS, GHS, ICF Macro. Heaton, T. B., R. Forste, J. P. Hoffmann, and D. Flake (2005). Cross-national variation

in family influences on child health: Soc Sci Med, v. 60, p. 97-108. Kabubo-Mariara, J., G. K. Ndenge, and D. K. Mwabu (2009). Determinants of

Children’s Nutritional Status in Kenya: Evidence from Demographic and Health Surveys Journal of African Economies, v. 18, p. 363–387.

Kandala, N. B., T. P. Madungu, J. B. Emina, K. P. Nzita, and F. P. Cappuccio (2011). Malnutrition among children under the age of five in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): does geographic location matter?: BMC Public Health, v. 11, p. 261.

Leckie, G., and C. Charlton (2013). runmlwin - A Program to Run the MLwiN Multilevel Modelling Software from within Stata: Journal of Statistical Software, v. 52, p. 1-40.

Madise, N., and M. Mpoma (1997). Child malnutrition and feeding practices in Malawi: Food and Nutrition Bulletin, v. 18, p. 190-201.

Snijders, T. A. B., and R. J. Bosker (2012). Multilevel analysis: an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling: London, SAGE.

Thum, Y. M. (1997). Hierarchical Linear Models for Multivariate Outcomes, Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, p. 77-108.

163

UNICEF (1990). Strategy for improved nutrition of children and women in developing countries: a UNICEF policy review, New York, UNICEF, p. 22.

UNICEF-Ghana (2008). Issues facing children in Ghana. [Cited 21/07/2015]. Available online at http://www.unicef.org/wcaro/Countries_1743.html, UNICEF.

Van de Poel, E., A. R. Hosseinpoor, C. Jehu-Appiah, J. Vega, and N. Speybroeck (2007). Malnutrition and the disproportional burden on the poor: the case of Ghana: Int J Equity Health, v. 6, p. 21.

Van de Poel, E., A. R. Hosseinpoor, N. Speybroeck, T. Van Ourti, and J. Vega (2008). Socioeconomic inequality in malnutrition in developing countries: Bull World Health Organ, v. 86, p. 282-91.

WHO (1995). Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of a WHO Expert Committee: World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser, v. 854, p. 1-452. WHO (2010). WHO Anthro for personal computers, version 3.2.2, 2011: Software for

164