MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Homestead Food Production (HFP) with or without Aquaculture Improves Women's Dietary Diversity Scores, Household Food Security and Income in Prey Veng Province, Cambodia

2016· article· en· W2592654607 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kristina D. Michaux, Li Huiqing, Larry D. Lynd, Aminuzzaman Talukder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of Canada
KeywordsFood securityAquacultureDietary diversityProduction (economics)Diversity (politics)PredationBusinessFood processingNatural resource economicsFood scienceFisheryEconomicsFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyBiologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives To determine the impact of plant‐based HFP (diversified home gardens) with or without aquaculture (fishponds) on women's dietary diversity, household food security, and income in Prey Veng province, Cambodia. Methods This was a three‐arm cluster‐randomized control trial conducted during July 2012 to June 2014. In total, 900 households in 90 villages (clusters) from four districts in Prey Veng province were randomized to one of three groups: 1) plant‐based HFP only; 2) plant‐based HFP plus aquaculture; and 3) control. Surveys were administered at baseline and end‐line, which included models on Individual Dietary Diversity (DD); a Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) tool; and the money earned from selling HFP products in the previous 2 months. Women were categorized into one of three groups based on their DD score: low DD (consumption of <=3 food groups in the previous 24h), medium DD (consumption 4 or 5 food groups); and high DD (consumption of >= 6 food groups). Households were categorized to one of four groups according to their degree of food security from food secure to severely food insecure. Data were analyzed as intent‐to‐treat. Missing values were handled using the maximum likelihood method, which takes all available data for each subject to construct the maximum likelihood function and estimates parameters in relevant models. To address the clustering effect, changes from baseline to endpoint were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models with multinomial distribution, using cumulative logit link for categorical variables and Gamma distribution for continuous measures. Results Women in the intervention groups (plant‐based HFP and plant‐based HFP + fishponds) were more likely to have consumed >=6 foods groups (high dietary diversity) versus <=3 food groups (low dietary diversity) in the previous 24h, as compared to women in the control group (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.01, 2.12; p<0.01; and OR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.01, 212; p=0.01, respectively). Similarly, households in the plant‐based HFP + fishponds group were more likely (OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.75) to be food secure as compared to control households (p=0.02), with a similar trend observed among households in the plant‐based HFP only group when compared to control (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.00, 2.52; p<0.127). Income from HFP increased from baseline to end‐line in the intervention households, with no change observed in the control households. Specifically, the average income (in USD) from HFP was 30.00 and 39.28 times greater for households in the plant‐based HFP and plant‐based HFP + fishponds groups, respectively, as compared to control (p< 0.001). Conclusions HFP with or without fishponds is an efficacious means of improving food security, dietary diversity, and livelihoods of poor, rural women farmers’ in Prey Veng province, Cambodia. Support or Funding Information This work was carried out with the aid of a grant from the International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada www.idrc.ca , and with financial support from the Government of Canada, provided through Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada (DFATD), www.international.gc.ca .”

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)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→