MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551324928 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000104

Impact of a community-based package of interventions on child development in Zambia: a cluster-randomised controlled trial

2016· article· en· W2551324928 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Peter C. Rockers, Günther Fink, Arianna Zanolini, Bowen Banda, Godfrey Biemba, Cierra N. Sullivan, Simon Mutembo, Vichaels Silavwe, Davidson H. Hamer

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFogarty International CenterNational Institutes of HealthGrand Challenges CanadaGovernment of the United KingdomPATH
KeywordsPsychological interventionCluster (spacecraft)Cluster randomised controlled trialMedicinePsychologyNursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Community-based programmes are a critical platform for improving child health and development. We tested the impact of a community-based early childhood intervention package in rural Zambia. METHODS: We conducted a non-blinded cluster randomised controlled trial in Southern Province, Zambia. 30 clusters of villages were matched based on population density and distance from the nearest health centre, and randomly assigned to intervention (15 clusters and 268 caregiver-child dyads) or control (15 clusters and 258 caregiver-child dyads). Caregivers were eligible if they had a child aged 6-12 months at baseline. In intervention clusters, health workers screened children for infections and malnutrition, and invited caregivers to attend fortnightly group meetings covering a nutrition and child development curriculum. 220 intervention and 215 control dyads were evaluated after 1 year. The primary outcomes were stunting and INTERGROWTH-21st neurodevelopmental assessment (NDA) scores. Weight-for-age and height-for-age z-scores based on WHO growth standards were also analysed. Secondary outcomes were child illness symptoms, dietary intake and caregiver-child interactions based on self-report. Impact was estimated using intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: The intervention package was associated with a 0.12 SD increase in weight-for-age (95% CI -0.14 to 0.38), a 0.15 SD increase in height-for-age (95% CI -0.18 to 0.48) and a reduction in stunting (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.28), whereas there was no measurable impact on NDA score. Children receiving the intervention package had fewer symptoms, a more diverse diet and more caregiver interactions. CONCLUSIONS: In settings like Zambia, community-based early childhood programmes appear to be feasible and appreciated by caregivers, as evidenced by high rates of uptake. The intervention package improved parenting behaviours and had a small positive, though statistically insignificant, impact on child development. Given the short time frame of the project, larger developmental impact is likely if differential parenting behaviours persist. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02234726; Results.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207