MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400149279 · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.102921

Assessing the Adherence to Iron and Folic Acid vs. Multiple Micronutrient Supplements During Pregnancy: A Cluster Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial in Cambodia

2024· article· en· W4400149279 on OpenAlex
Cassandra Sauer, Mai‐Anh Hoang, Hou Kroeun, Aman Gupta, Rem Ngik, Sokchea Meng, Jocelyne M Labonté, Rattana Kim, Mary Chea, Rolf Klemm, Ashutosh Mishra, Aishwarya Panicker, Sokhal Vin, Crystal D Karakochuk

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMinistry of HealthHealth CanadaUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicronutrientFolic acidPregnancyMedicineRandomized controlled trialCluster (spacecraft)Environmental healthObstetricsInternal medicineBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Guidelines in Cambodia recommend iron and folic acid (IFA) supplementation during pregnancy. However, recent research has proven the superiority of multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) over IFA to reduce the risk of maternal anemia and adverse birth outcomes. The Cambodian Ministry of Health has expressed strong interest to transition from IFA to MMS during pregnancy but are seeking evidence in the Cambodian context to rigorously inform this policy change. Our primary objective was to assess adherence to MMS vs. IFA supplementation during pregnancy in Cambodia, as one of the first steps. Methods: We conducted a cluster-randomized non-inferiority trial across 48 health centers in Kampong Thom province. A total of 1,546 pregnant women were recruited at their first antenatal care visit and randomized to one of three arms at the health center-level: 1. IFA for 90 days (IFA-90, n=515), the current standard of care. 2. MMS for 180 days via one 180 tablet bottle (MMS-180, n=516). 3. MMS for 180 days via two 90-tablet bottles (MMS-90, n=515). The primary outcome was the non-inferiority of adherence rates to MMS-180 (180 days) compared to IFA-90 (90 days), assessed by tablet counts. Mixed-effects linear regression models were used to estimate the mean difference (95% CI) in adherence rates, controlling for health centers (clusters) and using an “a priori’ non-inferiority margin of 15%. Results: Overall, 87% of women completed the trial, with similar rates across IFA-90, MMS-180 and MMS-90 groups (89%, 88%, and 86% respectively). At enrollment, mean±SD age of women was 28±6 years and gestational age was 8±3 weeks. Overall, mean (95%CI) adherence rates groups were 91% (90, 92), 95% (94, 96), and 95% (94, 96), respectively; adherence was higher in both MMS groups as compared to IFA-90 (P< 0.001). The adjusted mean (95%CI) difference in adherence rates between MMS-180 and IFA-90 groups was 3.5% (1.3, 5.6), and between MMS-180 and MMS-90 groups was 0.3% (-2.5, 1.9). Conclusions: Adherence to MMS-180 during pregnancy was non-inferior to IFA-90; in fact, MMS-180 showed superiority to IFA-90. Adherence rates in the MMS groups did not differ when tablets were distributed via one vs. two bottles. These findings support the policy change for the use of MMS during pregnancy in Cambodia. Funding Sources: Vitamin Angel Alliance.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.319 · 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