MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2174799933 · doi:10.4081/jphr.2015.582

Cluster-Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial to Compare Supplement Consumption and Adherence to Different Dosing Regimens for Antenatal Calcium and Iron-Folic Acid Supplementation to Prevent Preeclampsia and Anaemia: Rationale and Design of the Micronutrient Initiative Study

2015· article· en· W2174799933 on OpenAlexaff
Moshood Olanrewaju Omotayo, Katherine L. Dickin, Gina M. Chapleau, Stephanie Martin, Christopher Chang, Erick Mwanga, Jacqueline K. Kung’u, Rebecca J. Stoltzfus

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of public health research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsNutrition International
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsMedicinePillRegimenDosingRandomized controlled trialCluster randomised controlled trialPregnancyPediatricsObstetricsInternal medicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To prevent pre-eclampsia in populations with insufficient dietary calcium (Ca) intake, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends routine Ca supplementation during antenatal care (ANC). WHO guidelines suggest a complex dosing regimen, requiring as many as 5 pill-taking events per day when combined with iron and folic acid (IFA) supplements. Poor adherence may undermine public health effectiveness, so simpler regimens may be preferable. This trial will compare the effect of the WHO-recommended (higher-dose) regimen vs. a simpler, lower-dose regimen on supplement consumption and pill-taking behaviours in Kenyan ANC clients. DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a parallel, non-inferiority, cluster-randomized trial; we examined 16 primary care health facilities in Kenya, 1047 pregnant women between 16-30 weeks gestational age. Higher-dose regimen: 1.5 g elemental calcium in 3 separate doses (500 mg Ca/pill) and IFA (60 mg Fe + 400 µg folic acid) taken with evening dose. Lower-dose regimen: 1.0 g calcium in 2 separate doses (500 mg Ca/pill) with IFA taken as above. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome is Ca pills consumed per day, measured by pill counts. Secondary outcomes include IFA pills consumed per day, client knowledge, motivation, social support, and satisfaction, measured at 4 to 10 weeks post-enrolment. STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Unit of randomization is the healthcare facility; unit of analysis is individual client. Intent-to-treat analysis will be implemented with multi-level models to account for clustering. EXPECTED PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACT: If pregnant women prescribed lower doses of Ca ingest as many pills as women prescribed the WHO-recommended regimen, developing a lower-dose recommendation for antenatal Ca and IFA supplementation programs could save resources. Significance for public healthPre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal mortality. Based on clinical evidence of significant reduction in risk of pre-eclampsia, the WHO recommends including calcium (Ca) supplementation in antenatal care services in settings with inadequate dietary Ca intakes. A high daily amount of Ca administered in a complex dosing regimen is recommended to maximize efficacy and bioavailability. Factors such as client adherence, motivation, cost and logistical complexities may undermine effectiveness when implemented in public health programs. This cluster-randomized trial will compare Ca supplement consumption between higher and lower-dose regimens delivered through antenatal care in Kenya, integrated with iron-folic acid supplementation. If a lower-dose regimen improves adherence, women's Ca supplement consumption may be comparable to that achieved under a complex, higher-dose regimen. Evidence gained from this trial will guide public health planning for antenatal calcium supplementation programs to maximize benefits through reducing logistical, cost and adherence barriers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.446
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.045 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of public health researchSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207