MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of preventive and therapeutic zinc supplementation programs for young children in Burkina Faso: a randomized, masked, community‐based trial

2013· article· en· W1616606254 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elodie Becquey, Césaire T. Ouédraogo, Sonja Y. Hess, Noël Rouamba, Lea Prince, Stephen A. Vosti, Jean‐Bosco Ouédraogo, Kenneth H. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiarrheaMedicineIncidence (geometry)PlaceboPediatricsPopulationInternal medicineEnvironmental healthAlternative medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WHO/UNICEF recommend oral rehydration salts (ORS), continued feeding and 10–14 d of Zn supplementation (supp) to treat diarrhea; but preventive Zn supp may provide greater benefit than Zn supp given only for diarrhea. We compared 3 supp strategies in 6,426 children 6–30 mo old randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatments for 16, 32 or 48 wk: daily preventive supp (7mg Zn/d and ORS+placebo (Pl) for diarrhea), intermittent preventive supp (10mg Zn/d for 10d every 16wk and ORS+Pl for diarrhea), therapeutic supp (daily Pl and ORS+20mg Zn/d for 10d for diarrhea) or control (ORS for diarrhea). Home visits were completed weekly; free treatment was provided for uncomplicated diarrhea (>;3 liquid/semi‐liquid stools/d), fever or malaria. Supp group codes are still masked. Reported adherence to daily supp (93%) did not differ by group. Diarrhea incidence was low (0.5%) and baseline stunting high (28.3%). The 3 supp groups had moderately lower diarrhea incidence (OR=0.76 to 0.80, p<0.001) and gained slightly less length (−0.14 to −0.11 cm/16wk, p=0.002 to 0.011) than the control group, but did not differ from each other (p>;0.45). Differences in diarrhea incidence increased with time and appeared sooner in one supp group. Zn supp reduces diarrhea in this population; greater benefits of one strategy for diarrhea prevention may emerge when codes are revealed. Supports: Thrasher Research Fund and Canadian International Development Agency.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207