Trial effectiveness of daily and flexible administration of micronutrient sprinkles to control anaemia in young children in rural Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Iron deficiency-anaemia is a major public health problem worldwide, especially in developing \ncountries. Infants and young children aged between 6-24 months are one of the most \nvulnerable groups. Although iron intervention programme, such as iron-folate tablets, have \nbeen implemented for pregnant women at the national level in many countries, a suitable \neffective public health strategy to control childhood anaemia remains to be established. In \nresponse to this need, researchers at the Hospital for Sick Children and the University of \nToronto in Canada developed "Sprinkles", an innovative 'home-fortification' strategy. \nSprinkles consist of microencapsulated iron (as ferrous fumarate) and other essential \nmicronutrients in powder fonn that are packed into single serve sachets, which are to be mixed \ninto any kind of weaning food right before serving. The efficacy of Sprinkles in improving \nanaemia status of young children has been tested in several countries around the world. A \nprevious efficacy trial in Bangladesh, testing daily and weekly administration of Sprinkles, \nrevealed in focus group discussions that caregivers preferred more flexible instructions for \nSprinkles use. Therefore, in this study, the flexible administration of Sprinkles was examined \non the basis that it may increase programme effectiveness by improving adherence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".