Effect of a home-based health, nutrition, and responsive stimulation intervention and conditional cash transfers on child development and growth: a cluster-randomized controlled trial in Tanzania
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Evidence on the effect of community health worker (CHW) interventions and conditional cash transfers (CCTs) on child growth and development in sub-Saharan Africa remains sparse. Methods We conducted a single-blind, cluster-randomized controlled trial of an integrated home-visiting health, nutrition, and responsive stimulation intervention alone and in combination with CCTs to promote antenatal and child clinic attendance from 2017 to 2019 in rural Morogoro region, Tanzania. Pregnant women and caregivers with a child <1□year of age were enrolled. Twelve villages were randomized to either a (i) CHW (n=200 participants), (ii) CHW+CCT (n=200), or (iii) control arm (n=193). An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted for the primary trial outcomes of child cognitive, language and motor development assessed with the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development and child length/height-for-age z-scores (HAZ) at 18-months of follow-up. Results The CHW and CHW+CCT interventions had beneficial effects on child cognitive development as compared to control (standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.15; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05, 0.24) and SMD: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.28, respectively). The CHW+CCT intervention also had positive effects on language (SMD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.15) and motor development (SMD: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.28). Both CHW and CHW+CCT interventions had no effect on HAZ in the primary analysis; however, there were statistically significant positive effects in multivariable analyses. The CHW+CCT group (mean difference: 3.0 visits; 95% CI: 2.1-4.0) and the CHW group (mean difference: 1.5 visits; 95% CI: 0.6-2.5) attended greater number of child health and growth monitoring clinic visits as compared to the control group. Conclusion Integrated CHW home-visiting interventions can improve child cognitive development and may have positive effects on linear growth. Combining CHWs with CCTs may provide additional benefits on clinic visit attendance and selected child development outcomes. Trial registration number ISRCTN10323949 Key Questions Box What is already known? Community health worker interventions that integrate health, nutrition and responsive stimulation components can improve child development but evidence from sub-Saharan Africa is limited. Conditional cash transfers can increase healthcare utilization but effects on child development and growth remain unclear. What are the new findings? An integrated home-visiting community health worker intervention benefited child cognitive development and may have improved child linear growth in rural Tanzania. Combining conditional cash transfers with the community health worker intervention increased child clinic visit attendance as intended and improved child cognitive, motor, and language development and may have improved child linear growth as compared to control. What do the new findings imply? Community health workers can improve child development and possibly child growth outcomes; however, additional research is needed to determine the intensity and frequency of visits to optimize impact as well as the direct and indirect mechanisms through which community health worker interventions work. Conditional cash transfers may provide additional benefits on clinic attendance and selected development domains as compared to community health workers alone; however, additional research is needed to directly compare integrated supply-side and demand-side strategies to promote child growth and development.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».