MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022392907 · doi:10.1038/s41370-020-0224-4

Solid fuel use and early child development disparities in Ghana: analyses by gender and urbanicity

2020· article· en· W3022392907 on OpenAlexaff
José Ignacio Nazif‐Muñoz, John D. Spengler, Raphael E. Arku, Youssef Oulhote

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
KeywordsPsychologyEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Ghana, more than 77% of the population depends on biomass fuels for cooking. Previous studies show that solid fuel use (SFU) has adverse effects on pregnancy and child health outcomes. Yet, no previous study considered potential effects on early child development indicators (ECDI), nor how SFU effects may vary by gender, and rural and urban areas. We investigated the associations of SFU with ECDI measures, and whether these associations exhibited sex and urban/rural differences. We used the 2011-2012 Ghana's Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys-UNICEF (N = 3326 children; 3-4 years). We derived a binary ECDI measure reflecting whether the child is developmentally on track or not from a caregiver-report of ten yes/no/do not know questions designed specifically to assess four domains of early child development: learning-cognition, literacy-numeracy, socio-emotional, and physical. We used multilevel Poisson regressions adjusting for neighborhood, household, mother, and child's characteristics to estimate covariate-adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) of the associations between SFU and ECDI and its four dimensions. We run stratified analyses and used z-score tests of differences to evaluate effect modification by sex and urbanicity. Overall, 85% of children were exposed to SFU and 28% of children were not developmentally on track. After adjustment for confounders, children exposed to SFU were more likely to be not developmentally on track in comparison with nonexposed children (PR = 1.16; 95% confidence interval, [95% CI]: 1.10,1.22). These associations were stronger in girls (PR = 1.36; 95% CI: 1.03,1.79) in comparison with boys (PR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.73,1.04). No difference in associations was observed between urban and rural children. Overall, these associations were mainly driven by the literacy-numeracy dimension. In this study, we show that SFU was associated with developmental delays in Ghanaian girls. Policy efforts which tackle SFU should be mindful of gender disparities in susceptibility to indoor pollution.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.832

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exposure Science & Environmental EpidemiologySame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207