Prevention of developmental delays among children at public healthcare facilities of Pakistan: protocol for a cluster Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (cRCT) aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an integrated ECD package in preventing developmental delays among children aged two years, in public health care centers, as compared to a control arm. Methods: This is a parallel, two-arm, cluster randomized controlled trial. 768 mother-child pairs (‘dyads’) attending any of the 24-public health centers in two districts of Pakistan will be recruited, with an average of 32 participants per cluster. In the intervention arm, ECD based counselling sessions will be delivered to mother–child dyads by trained staff at public health care centers. Our primary outcome is reduction in prevalence of two or more developmental delays among children, from 38% to 23% in the intervention arm. Unit of randomization will be public health care center. 24 eligible clusters recruited will be randomized into intervention and control arms, using 1:1 allocation. Discussion: The integrated model of child care into primary health care has the potential to provide a feasible and sustainable model for improving child developmental scale. Key words: Early Child Development; Prevention; Developmental Delays; Public healthcare facilities
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 | 0.041 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.079 | 0.009 |
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".