Adaptation of a mental development assessment tool for the evaluation of the long‐term effect of a successful nutrition intervention in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study adapted a cognitive assessment tool to be used in evaluating nutrition interventions in developing countries and assessed its reliability and validity in Ghana. The tool was used to evaluate the long-term effect of the Enhancing Child Nutrition through Animal Source Food Management (ENAM) project. The former ENAM participants' children were contacted (now 13 to 15 years old). The items in the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence-II were adapted, pretested, refined, and pretested again. Cross-sectional data collection was conducted with former ENAM participants (60 interventions and 51 comparison families) in one of ENAM's three sites (the Guinea Savanna zone). Data on participants' socio-economic status and food insecurity were collected, along with their children's intellectual functioning, dietary intake, school attainment, anthropometry, and symptoms of depression. Alpha coefficient of the verbal subscale improved between the first and second pretest (from .34 to .80). After controlling for age, the intelligence scores of the children were associated with their grade (r = .35, p = .001) and academic performance (r = .26 to .33, p < .05). The verbal scale was associated with their anthropometry (r = .24 to .27, p < .05). The intervention children still recorded a better dietary diversity score than controls (6.8 vs 5.8, p = .0001); however, significance was lost after adjusting for confounders. There were no significant group differences in growth or intellectual functioning. The adapted Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence-II tool performed well in evaluating adolescent intellectual functioning in rural Ghana, and there were no long-term effects of ENAM intervention on child growth and development.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".