Using formative research to design context‐specific animal source food and multiple micronutrient powder interventions to improve the consumption of micronutrients by infants and young children in Tanzania, Kenya, Bangladesh and Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimal complementary feeding practices including consumption of multiple micronutrient powders (MNP) are recommended to improve micronutrient intake by infants and young children (IYC) 6-23 months. Formative research was used to design the behaviour change strategy to improve IYC micronutrient intake for the multicountry ENRICH project in rural impoverished areas of Tanzania, Kenya, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Employing a qualitative approach with multiple methods and guided by a social ecological framework, the study was conducted in several phases: data collection in the community, household and health facilities, initial analysis and household trials (HHT). Results found limited use of animal source foods (ASF) for feeding IYC and MNP largely unavailable. Although cost constrained access to ASF, potential more affordable context-specific ASF options were identified in each setting. Caregivers associated ASF with many positive attributes for IYC, but barriers to feeding them included lack of caregiver time and knowledge of specific preparation techniques, and limited advice from health workers. Feeding practices were identified that used time-efficient, specific preparations for eggs and other ASF, and demonstrated good initial acceptability and feasibility during HHT. Testing MNP in HHT found good initial feasibility and acceptability and provided an understanding of the facilitators and constraints for preparing, feeding and promoting MNP. In conclusion, formative research led to the design of context-specific ASF and MNP complementary feeding promotion strategies to improve IYC consumption of micronutrients by identifying the practices, benefits, motivations and alternative actions to overcome the barriers in each setting.
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 | 0.078 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".