Factors Influencing Willingness to Pay for Multiple Micronutrient Powder (Virutubishi) Supplements for Young Children in Arusha, Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Multiple micronutrient powders have shown a positive effect on anaemia prevention in children 6-59 months. For the purposes of uptake and sustainability, we explored ‘‘willingness to pay’’ for these health products at the household level for potential of co-investment in multiple micronutrient powders. Methods: During the intervention (six months), household surveys were conducted once with mothers of children 6-59 months in the Arusha District regarding willingness to pay for the multiple micronutrient powders. Results: Results from the survey show that about 66% of the target mothers are willing to pay for multiple micronutrient powders required for feeding of children at 0.068$ per sachet. Willingness to pay was associated with higher paternal education, higher maternal age, and families which do not keep animals. Conclusion: The results findings help to know the market situation of nutritional products. This information is useful for health policy planners in assessing economic viability and sustainability of the distribution of multiple micronutrient powders to consumers to avert micronutrient deficiencies and their effects on young children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".