MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968160950 · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(19)30317-1

Effects of nutritional supplementation and home visiting on growth and development in young children in Madagascar: a cluster-randomised controlled trial

2019· article· en· W2968160950 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Emanuela Galasso, Ann M. Weber, Christine P. Stewart, Lisy Ratsifandrihamanana, Lia C. H. Fernald

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Global Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentUniversity of California, DavisGrand Challenges CanadaWorld Bank Group
KeywordsMedicineAnthropometryMalnutritionRandomized controlled trialCluster randomised controlled trialPediatricsIntervention (counseling)Nutrition EducationChild developmentNutritional SupplementationPsychological interventionPhysical therapyGerontologyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evidence from efficacy trials suggests that lipid-based nutrient supplementation (LNS) and home visits can be effective approaches to preventing chronic malnutrition and promoting child development in low-income settings. We tested the integration of these approaches within an existing, large-scale, community-based nutrition programme in Madagascar. METHODS: We randomly allocated 125 programme sites to five intervention groups: standard-of-care programme with monthly growth monitoring and nutrition education (T0); T0 plus home visits for intensive nutrition counselling through an added community worker (T1); T1 plus LNS for children aged 6-18 months (T2); T2 plus LNS for pregnant or lactating women (T3); or T1 plus fortnightly home visits to promote and encourage early stimulation (T4). Pregnant women (second or third trimester) and infants younger than 12 months were enrolled in the trial. Primary outcomes were child growth (length-for-age and weight-for-length Z scores) and development at age 18-30 months. Analyses were by intention to treat. The trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN14393738. FINDINGS: The study enrolled 3738 mothers: 1248 pregnant women (250 women in each of the T0, T1, T2, and T4 intervention groups and 248 in the T3 intervention group) and 2490 children aged 0-11 months (497 children in T0, 500 in T1, 494 in T2, 499 in T3, and 500 in T4) at baseline who were assessed at 1-year and 2-year intervals. There were no main effects of any of the intervention groups on any measure of anthropometry or any of the child development outcomes in the full sample. However, compared with children in the T0 intervention group, the youngest children (<6 months at baseline) in the T2 and T3 intervention groups who were fully exposed to the child LNS dose had higher length-for-age Z scores (a significant effect of 0·210 SD [95% CI -0·004 to 0·424] for T2 and a borderline effect of 0·216 SD [0·043 to 0·389] for T3) and lower stunting prevalence (-9·0% [95% CI -16·7 to -1·2] for T2 and -8·2% [-15·6 to -0·7] for T3); supplementing mothers conferred no additional benefit. INTERPRETATION: LNS for children for a duration of 12 months only benefited growth when it began at an early age, suggesting the need to supplement infants at age 6 months in a very low-income context. The lack of effect of the early stimulation messages and home visits might be due to little take-up of behaviour-change messages and delivery challenges facing community health workers. FUNDING: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development, Strategic Impact Evaluation Fund, World Bank Innovation Grant, Early Learning Partnership Grant, World Bank Research Budget, Japan Nutrition Trust Fund, Power of Nutrition, and the National Nutrition Office of Madagascar.

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)0.001
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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations106
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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