MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401840624 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-70861-1

Effect of nutrition education on the nutritional status of pregnant women in Robe and Goba Towns, Southeast Ethiopia, using a cluster randomized controlled trial

2024· article· en· W4401840624 on OpenAlexaff
Girma Beressa, Susan J. Whiting, Tefera Belachew

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersJimma University
KeywordsMedicineNutrition EducationMalnutritionPregnancyPsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialCluster (spacecraft)Cluster randomised controlled trialCluster samplingIntervention (counseling)Systematic samplingPediatricsPhysical therapyPopulationFamily medicineObstetricsEnvironmental healthGerontologyNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maternal malnutrition is pervasive throughout the world, notably in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), including Ethiopia. This study aimed to assess the effect of nutrition education on the nutritional status of pregnant women in urban settings in Southeast Ethiopia. A community-based two-arm parallel cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted among 447 randomly selected pregnant women attending antenatal care (224 intervention and 223 control). We used a multistage cluster sampling technique followed by systematic sampling to select the pregnant women. Pregnant women who participated in the intervention arm received six nutrition education sessions. Women in the control group received standard care. A nonstretchable mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) tape was used to measure the MUAC. A linear mixed effects model (LMM) was used to evaluate the effect of the intervention on MUAC, accounting for the clustering. The net mean ± standard error of MUAC between the intervention and control groups was 0.59 ± 0.05 (P < 0.0001). The multivariable LMM indicated that having received nutrition education interventions (β = 0.85, 95% CI 0.60, 1.12, P < 0.0001) improved the MUAC measurement of pregnant women. Thus, nutrition education during pregnancy will combat undernutrition among pregnant women.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (PACTR202201731802989), retrospectively registered on 24/01/2022.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→