MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173420072 · doi:10.1093/cdn/nzab083

Girl-Powered Nutrition Program: Key Themes from a Formative Evaluation of a Nutrition Program Co-designed and Implemented by Adolescent Girls in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

2021· article· en· W3173420072 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsNutrition International
FundersGlobal Affairs Canada
KeywordsGirlFormative assessmentFocus groupNutrition EducationPovertyCurriculumAgency (philosophy)Medical educationInternational developmentProgram evaluationPsychologyMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceGerontologyPedagogyBusinessSociologySocial scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To improve nutritional knowledge and attitudes of girls and young women, Nutrition International (NI) partnered with the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGGS) to pilot the Girl-Powered Nutrition (GPN) program from 2018 to 2020 in 4 countries (Madagascar, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania). OBJECTIVE: The aim was to share adolescent girls' and programmers' experiences with co-designing and implementing the GPN program in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: A formative evaluation of the GPN program was commissioned by NI and undertaken by Universalia Management Group (Universalia). The evaluation was largely qualitative (employing focus groups, interviews, and document analysis). Based on the results of the formative evaluation, themes related to working with adolescent girls were identified. RESULTS: The involvement of adolescents in the design, implementation, and evaluation of nutrition programming that targets them is essential for meaningful uptake. Sufficient time and respect must be given to the co-design process, including clearly defining adolescents' roles, ensuring transparency and clear communication, and managing adolescents' expectations. Ensuring adequate exposure and suitable timing for adolescent nutrition programming from adequately trained staff were identified as good practices from the evaluation. Program curriculum and activities must be appropriately tailored to adolescent age and stage, target adolescents and their gatekeepers and duty-bearers, and address the underlying issues of poverty, gender inequality, and structural norms that negatively impact adolescents' agency and nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: This research supports and elaborates on several documented and accepted good practices for working with adolescents to improve nutrition knowledge and attitudes. Similar programs with key features such as co-design, suitable timing, curriculum, and exposure of programs by age group, addressing underlying structural issues, the involvement of gatekeepers and duty-bearers, and confidence-building can increase adolescent girls' nutrition knowledge and attitudes.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.317 · 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