MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Iodized Salt Improves Child's Iodine Status, Mental Development, and Physical Growth in a Cluster Randomized Trial in Ethiopia

2015· article· en· W391284880 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karim Bougma, Grace S. Marquis, Frances E. Aboud, Edward A. Frongillo, Tizita Lemma, Aregash Samuel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIodised saltMedicineMicronutrientRandomized controlled trialIodine deficiencyIodinePediatricsInternal medicineThyroid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of iodized salt programs to improve mental development and physical growth has not been studied in children < 36 months. Using a cluster randomized design, 1835 infants 5‐11 mo old were enrolled in 60 villages in Amhara, Ethiopia. Following salt iodization legislation, iodized salt was forced early into the markets of 30 villages (intervention, I) before it became available in the 30 control (C) villages. The two groups were similar at baseline. Children (85% of the baseline sample) were re‐assessed at age 20‐29 mo. Treatment effects were analyzed using linear mixed models. The median endline urinary iodine concentration (UIC) was significantly higher in group I (161.6 vs 124.0 µg/L; p<0.001). Group I had significantly higher scores at reassessment on three of the four Bayley‐III subscales: cognitive (std mean 6.40 vs 6.14; p<0.05), receptive language (std mean 7.19 vs 6.92; p<0.05), and fine motor (std mean 7.97 vs 7.59; p<0.05). Moderator analysis indicated that length‐for‐age in children was higher in group I for those with high household assets. UIC was higher in I vs C children with an unschooled mother, unimproved water, and no recent illness. These results support universal salt iodization to improve children's life. [Funded by Micronutrient Initiative, Canada]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicInfant Development and Preterm Care→French-language works237,207→