MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256354369 · doi:10.1177/15648265140354s305

Community Interventions for Dietary Improvement in Ghana

2014· article· en· W2256354369 on OpenAlexaff
Grace S. Marquis, Esi K Colecraft

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Nutrition Bulletin · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicineIntervention (counseling)Nutrition EducationEnvironmental healthLoanBaseline (sea)LivestockGerontologyNursingBusinessGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Background. Low caregiver income and poor nutrition knowledge and skills are important barriers to achieving optimal child feeding in rural Ghana. OBJECTIVE: An integrated microcredit and nutrition education intervention was implemented to address these barriers. METHODS: Using a quasi-experimental design, 134 caregivers of children 2 to 5 years of age in six intervention communities were enrolled into self-selected savings and loan groups. They received small individual loans over four 16-week cycles to support their income-generating activities. Nutrition and entrepreneurial education was provided during weekly loan repayment meetings. Another 261 caregivers in six comparison communities did not receive the intervention. Data on household sociodemographic and economic characteristics, perception of income-generating activity profits, and children's consumption of animal-source foods in the previous week were collected at baseline and at four additional time points. Differences according to group (intervention vs. control) and time (baseline vs. endline) were analyzed with chi-square and Student's t-tests. RESULTS: The intervention and comparison groups did not differ by caregivers' age and formal education; few (35) had previous experience with microcredit loans. At endline, more intervention than comparison caregivers perceived that their business profits had increased (59% vs. 23%, p < .001). In contrast to comparison children, after 16 months of intervention children consumed more livestock meat (p =.001), organ meat (p = .04), eggs (p = .001), and milk and milk products (p < .0001) in the previous week in comparison with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated food-centered strategies can improve children's diets, which will enhance their nutritional status, health, and cognitive outcomes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood and Nutrition BulletinSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207