MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762124512 · doi:10.3945/jn.117.257386

Maternal and Child Supplementation with Lipid-Based Nutrient Supplements, but Not Child Supplementation Alone, Decreases Self-Reported Household Food Insecurity in Some Settings

2017· article· en· W2762124512 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine P. Adams, Emmanuel Ayifah, Thokozani Phiri, Malay Kanti Mridha, Seth Adu‐Afarwuah, Mary Arimond, Charles D. Arnold, Joseph Cummins, Sohrab Hussain, Chiza Kumwenda, Susana L Matias, Anna Lartey, Kenneth Maleta, Stephen A. Vosti, Kathryn G. Dewey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutrition · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDyadRandomized controlled trialPsychologyMedicineDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is unknown whether self-reported measures of household food insecurity change in response to food-based nutrient supplementation. We assessed the impacts of providing lipid-based nutrient supplements (LNSs) to women during pregnancy and postpartum and/or to their children on self-reported household food insecurity in Malawi [DOSE and DYAD trial in Malawi (DYAD-M)], Ghana [DYAD trial in Ghana (DYAD-G)], and Bangladesh [Rang-Din Nutrition Study (RDNS) trial]. Longitudinal household food-insecurity data were collected during 3 individually randomized trials and 1 cluster-randomized trial testing the efficacy or effectiveness of LNSs (generally 118 kcal/d). Seasonally adjusted Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) scores were constructed for 1127 DOSE households, 732 DYAD-M households, 1109 DYAD-G households, and 3671 RDNS households. The impact of providing LNSs to women during pregnancy and the first 6 mo postpartum and/or to their children from 6 to 18–24 mo on seasonally adjusted HFIAS scores was assessed by using negative binomial models (DOSE, DYAD-M, and DYAD-G trials) and mixed-effect negative binomial models (RDNS trial). In the DOSE and DYAD-G trials, seasonally adjusted HFIAS scores were not different between the LNS and non-LNS groups. In the DYAD-M trial, the average household food-insecurity scores were 14% lower (P = 0.01) in LNS households than in non-LNS households. In the RDNS trial, compared with non-LNS households, food-insecurity scores were 17% lower (P = 0.02) during pregnancy and the first 6 mo postpartum and 15% lower (P = 0.02) at 6–24 mo postpartum in LNS households. The daily provision of LNSs to mothers and their children throughout much of the “first 1000 d” may improve household food security in some settings, which could be viewed as an additional benefit that may accrue in households should policy makers choose to invest in LNSs to promote child growth and development. These trials were registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00945698 (DOSE) NCT01239693 (DYAD-M), NCT00970866 (DYAD-G) and NCT01715038 (RDNS).

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NutritionSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207