Impact of Multiple Hygienic Interventions on Caregivers’ Behaviors in a Conflict Setting, Yemen: Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Several household hygiene programs have been implemented by the Ministry of Public Health and Population and international nongovernment organizations to reduce the risk factors related to child morbidity and mortality in Yemen. However, no research has been conducted to assess the impact of such interventions on caregivers’ hygiene behavior. We therefore carried out a cluster-randomized controlled trial to assess whether such interventions could improve caregivers’ hygiene behavior. Objective The study aims to identify the impact of hygiene promotion interventions on mothers’ practices related to water, sanitation, and hygiene. Methods A 6-month cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in Hufash District of Al-Mahweet Province in Yemen from May to October 2015. In total, 20 villages were randomly selected and assigned to an intervention arm that received hygiene promotional interventions and a control arm. In total, 358 households were interviewed at baseline and the endpoint. A logistic regression model was fitted to data, and the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) was used to estimate the effect size of the intervention. Results The intervention made significant improvements in caregivers’ handwashing after using a latrine (AOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.75-3.90) and before feeding the baby (AOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.14-2.92), safe disposal of child feces (AOR 2.0, 95% CI 1.35-2.53), covering of remaining food (AOR 1.1, 95% CI 1.08-1.19), cleaning of cooking utensils (AOR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08-1.51), and cleanness of drinking water storage containers (AOR 1.3, 95% CI 1.17-1.46). However, the intervention had no effect on caregivers’ handwashing practices after cleaning child feces, before preparing food, and before eating a meal, as well as no improvement in cleanness of the floor of the kitchen. Conclusions The findings from this trial reveal the important role that hygiene promotion can play in improving caregivers’ behaviors that could lead to better child health in high-risk communities where access to primary health care is limited. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03810430; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03810430
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".