The impact of an integrated community-based micronutrient and health programme on stunting in Malawian preschool children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the 1996-2005 integrated community-based micronutrient and health (MICAH) programme on linear growth retardation (stunting) in Malawian preschool children living in rural areas. DESIGN: Prospective study of three large-scale cross-sectional surveys conducted in 1996, 2000 and 2004 in MICAH and Comparison populations. SETTING: Rural areas in Malawi. SUBJECTS: Preschool children (6.0-59.9 months) from randomly selected households (474 from the 1996 baseline survey; 1264 from 2000 MICAH areas; 1500 from 2000 Comparison areas; 1959 from 2004 MICAH areas; and 1008 from 2004 Comparison areas), who responded to a household questionnaire, were weighed and measured using standard protocols. RESULTS: At the baseline in 1996, the prevalence of stunting (60.2 %) was very high. By 2000, the prevalence of stunting had declined to 50.6 % and 56.0 % (chi2 = 7.8, P = 0.005) in MICAH and Comparison areas, respectively. In 2004, the prevalence of stunting did not differ significantly between MICAH and Comparison areas (43.0 % v. 45.1 %; chi2 = 1.11, P = 0.3). Severe stunting affected 34.7 % of children at baseline, which declined to 15.8 % and 17.1 % (chi2 = 0.86, P = 0.4) in MICAH and Comparison areas, respectively, by 2004. Regional variations existed, with proportionately fewer children from the Northern region being stunted compared to their Central and Southern region counterparts. CONCLUSION: Given the length of implementation, wide-scale coverage and positive impact on child growth in Phase I (1996-2000), the MICAH programme is a potential model for combating linear growth retardation in rural areas in Malawi, although the catch-up improvement in Comparison areas during Phase II (2000-2004) cannot be adequately explained.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".