MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2293913401 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n4p60

Impact of Agricultural Diversification and Commercialization on Child Nutrition in Zambia: A Dose Response Analysis

2016· article· en· W2293913401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rhoda Mofya‐Mukuka, Christian Kuhlgatz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationAgricultureWastingDiversification (marketing strategy)Subsistence agricultureMalnutritionAgricultural diversificationBusinessEconomicsAgricultural economicsEconomic growthGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zambia, and in particular Eastern Province, has one of the highest levels of malnutrition in the world with 40% of the children having stunted growth. Agricultural diversification and commercialization remain critical for improving the nutrition status of children. However, the impact may vary according to the level of the two agricultural interventions. Results from the dose response function using generalised propensity score method showed that for commercialization, there is highest risk of stunting at medium commercialization levels at 50%. A farm at this point can improve nutrition status by moving either towards high or towards zero levels. Commercialization has a negative effect on short-term nutrition outcomes leading to underweight and wasting. This could indicate that in areas with less everyday access to a range of food items, capital accumulation may not help to avoid deficiencies in child nutrition. In combination with our findings on diversification, two policy options can be recommended. Either the households specialize in cash crops to increase income, or they go into subsistence farming with high levels of diversification. Other off-farm income sources are suggested for resilience in case of yield shocks.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→