MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404697156 · doi:10.1177/02601060241294133

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of vitamin A supplementation programs in Africa: A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4404697156 on OpenAlex
Obidimma Ezezika, Selina Mae Quibrantar, Asua Okolie, Oluwaseun Ariyo, Alanna Marson

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

VenueNutrition and Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLMedicineIncentiveImplementation researchScopusMEDLINENursingMedical educationFamily medicinePsychological interventionPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) impacts over 50% of children aged 6–59 months in sub-Saharan Africa, causing severe health issues. Despite the importance of vitamin A supplementation (VAS) programs, barriers limit their effectiveness, making it essential to understand these factors for better outcomes. Aim: This systematic review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to VAS programs in Africa, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to conceptualize the findings. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across OVID Embase, OVID Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, CINAHL and CAB Direct. Studies were excluded if they did not report VAS administration via capsules or droplets in large-scale programs or omitted discussions on implementation barriers and facilitators. Results: The search yielded 4377 citations, with 10 studies meeting eligibility criteria, published from 2002 to 2021 across 12 countries. The most frequently represented were Ethiopia and Zimbabwe. A total of nine barriers and seven facilitators to VAS programs were identified. The most frequently cited barriers were capsule stock-outs, limited resources and lack of incentive for staff, while the most frequently cited facilitators were Child Health Days and involvement of community-based health workers. The key CFIR constructs associated with these findings were Tailoring Strategies, Incentive Systems and Available Resources. Conclusion: The barriers and facilitators identified in this review offer valuable insights for improving VAS coverage and implementation in Africa. Tailoring implementation strategies based on these findings can enhance the effectiveness and coverage of VAS programs.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.335 · 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