An intervention based on self efficacy and parenting competence to help recovery childhood malnutrition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To assess the effect of the program “Foundations for a healthy life” on parental competence for correct nutrition and on nutritional status of malnourished grade 1 children on a program of nutritional recovery with Amaranth.Methods: Design: Before-after study with intervention and follow up, from June 2015 to November 2017. Instruments: Scale Seca 700, stadiometer Seca 220, Reminder 24 hours and Self-perception of Parental Competence Tool. Setting: Ministry of Health: Nutritional Recovery Program. Participants: Intervention group: Twenty-six dyads caregiver-malnourished grade one children; Control group: Thirty-two malnourished grade one children. Intervention: “Foundations for a healthy life” program. Variables: Nutritional status, parental competence, Kilocalories, macronutrients, fruit and vegetables. Analysis: Wilcoxon and t student tests, Relative Risk, 95% CI, significance p ≤ .05.Results: Intervention vs control group: normalization on the nutritional status 63% vs 29% (p ≤ .05). Caloric adequacy 27% to 81% and protein adequacy 23% to 58%, increased intake of fruits and vegetables. Caregivers trained was associated with the improvement of the nutritional status of the children: post-intervention third month (RR 2.27, 95% CI, p ≤ .05).Conclusions and Implications: The program was effective in improving nutritional status and PCCN by continuing for three months. It is recommended follow-up six months to verify development of new habits.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".