Is Early Childhood Development Care at Public Health Facilities in Pakistan Effective? A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Significant brain development in children occurs from birth to 2 years, with environment playing an important role. Stimulation interventions are widely known to be effective in enhancing early childhood development (ECD). This study aims to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating ECD care delivered by lady health visitors (LHVs) at public health facilities in rural Pakistan. METHOD: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted through public health facilities in 2 districts of Punjab, Pakistan. A total of 22 clusters (rural health centers and subdistrict hospitals) were randomly allocated to receive routine care (control: n=11 clusters, 406 mother-child pairs) or counseling (intervention: n=11 clusters, 398 mother-child pairs). All children aged 11-12 months without any congenital abnormality were eligible for enrollment. The intervention was delivered by the LHVs to mothers with children aged 12-24 months in 3 quarterly sessions. RESULTS: The primary outcome was the prevention of ECD delays in children aged 24 months (assessed with the Ages and Stages Questionnaire-3). Analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis. A total of 804 mother-child pairs were registered in the study, of which 26 (3.3%) pairs were lost to follow-up at the endpoint. The proportion of children with 2 or more developmental delays was significantly less in the intervention arm (13%) as compared to the control arm (41%) at an endpoint (odds ratio=0.21; 95% confidence interval=0.11, 0.42). Children in the intervention arm also had significantly better anthropometric measurements when aged 24 months than the children in the control arm. CONCLUSION: The integrated ECD care intervention for children aged 12-24 months at public health facilities was found to be effective in enhancing ECD and reducing the proportion of children with global development delays.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".