MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389168563 · doi:10.1002/cl2.1361

Effectiveness of nutrition counseling for pregnant women in low‐ and middle‐income countries to improve maternal and infant behavioral, nutritional, and health outcomes: A systematic review

2023· review· en· W4389168563 on OpenAlexaffabout
Omar Dewidar, Jessica John, Aqeel Baqar, Mohamad Tarek Madani, Ammar Saad, Alison Riddle, Erika Ota, Jacqueline K. Kung’u, Mandana Arabi, Manoj Kumar Raut, Seth Selorm Klobodu, Sarah Rowe, Jennifer Hatchard, Jennifer Busch‐Hallen, Chowdhury Jalal, Sara Wuehler, Vivian Welch

Bibliographic record

VenueCampbell Systematic Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsNutrition InternationalBruyèreUniversity of Ottawa
FundersArak University of Medical SciencesUniversitetet i Oslo
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialCINAHLMedicineMEDLINESystematic reviewFamily medicineCochrane LibraryGerontologyPsychological interventionNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Nutritional counseling, which includes two-way interactive education, has been hypothesized to improve the health and nutritional status of pregnant women, but little is known about the impact such practice of care might have on maternal and infant health and behavioral outcomes of pregnant women living in low income, low-middle income, and upper-middle-income countries (LMIC)s. Objectives We conducted a systematic review to appraise the effectiveness and impact on health equity of two-way nutritional counseling practices in LMICs on maternal and infant behavioral, nutritional, and health outcomes. Search Methods We conducted electronic searches for relevant studies on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and the Cochrane CENTRAL for randomized and non-randomized trials on the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutritional counseling among pregnant women from the date of database inception up to June 22, 2021. In addition, we searched references of included studies in systematic reviews, gray literature resources, and unpublished studies or reports that satisfied our eligibility criteria using a focused Google search. Selection Criteria We included randomized and non-randomized controlled studies (NRS), controlled before and after, and interrupted time series that assessed the effectiveness of two-way interactive nutrition counseling targeting pregnant women in LMICs. Data Collection and Analysis Data extraction and risk of bias were conducted in duplicate. The risk of bias (ROB) for randomized trials (RCT) was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews, and ROB for NRS was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). RCT and NRS were meta-analyzed separately. Main Results Our search identified 6418 records and 52 studies met our inclusion criteria, but only 28 were used in the quantitative analysis. Twenty-eight studies were conducted in Asia, the most in Iran. Eight studies were conducted in Africa. Two-way interactive nutritional counseling during pregnancy may improve dietary caloric intake (mean difference [MD]: 81.65 calories, 95% confidence interval [CI], 15.37–147.93, three RCTs; I 2 = 42%; moderate certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), may reduce hemorrhage (relative risk [RR]: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.25–1.54, two RCTs; I 2 = 40%; very low certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), may improve protein (MD: 10.44 g, 95% CI, 1.83–19.05, two RCTs; I 2 = 95%; high certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), fat intake (MD: 3.42 g, 95% CI, −0.20 to 7.04, two RCTs; I 2 = 0%; high certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment), and may improve gestational weight gain within recommendations (RR: 1.84; 95% CI, 1.10–3.09, three RCTs; I 2 = 69%). Nutrition counseling probably leads to the initiation of breastfeeding immediately after birth (RR: 1.72; 95% CI, 1.42–2.09, one RCT). There was little to no effect on reducing anemia (RR: 0.77; 95% CI, 0.50–1.20, three RCTs; I 2 = 67%; very low certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment) risk of stillbirths (RR: 0.81; 95% CI, 0.52–1.27, three RCTs; I 2 = 0%; moderate certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment) and risk of cesarean section delivery (RR: 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76–1.20, four RCTs; I 2 = 36%; moderate certainty of evidence using GRADE assessment). Authors’ Conclusions Our review highlights improvements in maternal behavioral and health outcomes through interactive nutrition counseling during pregnancy. However, we are uncertain about the effects of nutrition counseling due to the low certainty of evidence and a low number of studies for some key outcomes. Moreover, the effects on health equity remain unknown. More methodologically rigorous trials that focus on a precise selection of outcomes driven by the theory of change of nutrition counseling to improve maternal and infant behavioral and health outcomes and consider equity are required.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.009
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCampbell Systematic ReviewsSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207