MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Maternal Education and Home Environment Quality Protect Infants in Low Asset Families From Poor Growth

2016· article· en· W4389034326 on OpenAlexaff
Maureen M. Black, Nicholas Tilton, Kristen Hurley, Sylvia Fernandez Rao, Nagalla Balakrishna, Kimberly Harding, Gregory A. Reinhart, KV Radhakrishna, P Ravinder, K. Madhavan Nair

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsNutrition International
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderweightMedicineQuartileDemographyOverweightPediatricsBody mass indexEnvironmental healthConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE Economic inequities are common in low and middle‐income countries, and are associated with poor growth among young children. To examine whether maternal education and home environment quality attenuate the association between economic inequities and children's growth. METHODS The sample included baseline data from 512 infants and 321 preschoolers in 26 villages in rural India (Project Grow Smart). Data collection included child growth (weight and length/height measured and converted to wt/age, ln/ht/age and BMI/age z‐scores, WAZ, LAZ/HAZ, BAZ) and hemoglobin (Hb); maternal education, wt/ht and Hb; and economic inequities measured by household assets (weighted score 0–8) and observations of home environment quality (HOME Inventory). Maternal education (completion of primary school or beyond) and home quality (top quartile) were combined into a 3‐level education/home protective factor (PF; high education and home quality, neither [0], either [1], both [2]). Data were analyzed using linear mixed models for infants and preschoolers separately, adjusted for gender and clustering within villages, and including asset by PF interactions. Interactions were interpreted at low/high assets (mean±SD). RESULTS Findings for infants/preschoolers: mean age 8.6/36.6 mo; underweight (WAZ<−2): 18.9%/45.9%; stunting (LAZ/HAZ<−2): 19.5%/40.6%; anemic (Hb<11.0 g/dL): 68.8%/48.6%. Findings for mothers of infants/preschoolers: mean age: 22.9/25.0 y; underweight (BMI<18.5): 37.8%/43.0%; anemic (Hb<12.0 g/dL): 43.7%/34.2%, primary school or beyond: 75.1%/55.2%. Among infants, relationships between assets and WAZ and LAZ are significantly attenuated by PF (p<0.01 for both) and relationships between assets and BAZ are marginally attenuated (p<0.10). Among infants, at low asset levels, PF accounts for 1.3 difference in WAZ (β= 0.65, p<0.01), a 1.38 difference in LAZ (β=0.69, p<0.01), and a 0.7 difference in BAZ (β=0.35, p<0.01). At high asset levels, the WAZ gap between children with/without PF narrows by 0.14 for 1 PF and 0.28 for both PFs (interaction β=0.14, p<0.01) (); the LAZ gap narrows by 0.13 for 1 PF and 0.26 for both PFs (interaction β=0.13, p<0.01); and the BAZ gap narrows by 0.08 for 1 PF and 0.16 for both PFs (interaction β=0.08, p<0.10). Among preschoolers, PF have a marginal independent association with BAZ (p<0.10), with no attenuation in relationships between assets and children's growth. CONCLUSIONS Maternal education and home environment quality may protect infants in low‐asset families from poor growth, illustrating the importance of the care giving context in offsetting the negative consequences of economic inequities on growth during infancy. Among preschoolers, maternal education and home environment quality do not provide growth protection from economic inequities in areas with high rates of stunting. To promote infant growth in low‐asset families, findings support early responsive care giving intervention. Support or Funding Information Micronutrient Initiative, The Mathile Institute for the Advancement of Human Nutrition

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→