Pilot project of the Nutrition-Friendly School Initiative (NFSI) in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso and Cotonou, Benin, in West Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the first African experience with the Nutrition-Friendly School Initiative (NFSI) in two large West African cities: Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso and Cotonou, Benin. NFSI was launched by the World Health Organization (WHO) and its partners in 2006, as a means of preventing the double burden of malnutrition: the coexistence of undernutrition and overnutrition among school-children. NFSI pilot-testing is one component of the Partnership Project on the Double Burden of Malnutrition, funded by the Canadian International Development Agency for 6 years (2008-2014). The Project assisted the government in the selection of pilot schools, fostered the installation of health and nutrition committees in selected schools, and helped with the initial school self-assessments. In accordance with the empowering philosophy of health promotion, pilot schools did not follow a pre-defined schedule of interventions, except for the training of teachers in nutrition education and the nutritional (anthropometric) surveillance of schoolchildren. For the latter activities, technical assistance and seminal funds were provided. Yearly planning workshops were held for school committees, with WHO support. In both settings, training was given to street vendors in order to improve the hygiene and nutritional value of food sold to schoolchildren. Other activities included special nutrition events and sanitation measures. In both cities, NFSI showed promising results in terms of school and community mobilization towards improved nutrition and health; however, NFSI must be better understood as an endogenous and self-sustaining approach. Furthermore, household poverty and scarce school resources appear as major barriers to gaining full impact of NFSI in low-income populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".