MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406749029 · doi:10.1101/2025.01.22.25320952

Testing real-world feasibility and acceptability of implementing an intravenous iron intervention for pregnant women with moderate and severe anaemia in Bangladesh: A demonstration project protocol

2025· preprint· en· W4406749029 on OpenAlexaff
Khic-Houy Prang, Aminur Rahman, Ebony Verbunt, Hana Sabanovic, Shamim Ahmed, Mohammed Imrul Hasan, Eliza M. Davidson, Alistair R. D. McLean, Sabine Braat, Clare Glover‐Wright, Natalie Carvalho, Sant‐Rayn Pasricha, Jena Hamadani, Bidhan Krishna Sarker

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIron Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Global Health Research
FundersBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsIntravenous ironProtocol (science)Intervention (counseling)MedicinePregnancyMaternal morbidityObstetricsPediatricsIron deficiencyAnemiaAlternative medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Antenatal anaemia is a significant global health problem, affecting 48% of pregnant women in South Asia. The standard of care in Bangladesh is oral iron and folic acid supplementation. However, access and adherence to oral iron supplementation are subpar. An alternative treatment available to address antenatal anaemia is intravenous (IV) iron. Modern IV iron products are routinely used in high-income clinical settings, including primary and secondary care, to deliver a high dose of iron in a single short infusion. A demonstration project will be conducted to test the real-world feasibility and acceptability of implementing an IV iron intervention to treat pregnant women with moderate and severe anaemia in the primary healthcare setting of Bangladesh. In this protocol paper, we describe the implementation research program that will guide the development, implementation, and evaluation of an IV iron intervention in real-world settings. Methods We will use implementation science frameworks to guide the demonstration project. The implementation research program includes three phases: 1) a formative phase in preparation for the implementation of an IV iron intervention involving a review, qualitative research, and readiness assessment; 2) the development and implementation of IV iron intervention care pathways and strategies to support the uptake and delivery of the intervention using a participatory research approach; and 3) a process evaluation of IV iron intervention care pathways and strategies involving qualitative and quantitative assessment of the costs, processes and contextual factors affecting its implementation. Discussion Modern IV iron products present a novel opportunity to reduce the disproportionate burden of antenatal anaemia in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). The demonstration project will ascertain whether an IV iron intervention can be effectively introduced into routine antenatal care in Bangladesh. The extent to which it is considered an acceptable treatment by pregnant women with moderate or severe anaemia receiving the intervention, healthcare providers delivering the intervention, and policymakers will be determined. If successful, understanding how an IV iron intervention will be implemented across several care pathways and its associated costs will inform the scalability of an IV iron intervention in the primary healthcare system of Bangladesh and provide implementation guidance in other LMICs. Contributions to the literature Modern IV iron products can quickly restore iron levels, offering a new opportunity to address antenatal anaemia in LMICs. The demonstration project in Bangladesh will involve pregnant women, local communities, and healthcare workers to co-design anaemia care pathways and strategies for implementing an IV iron program in primary care. The demonstration project provides access to an alternative treatment, trains healthcare workers, and builds local capacity for anaemia management. Testing and refining anaemia care pathways and strategies in a real-world setting will offer insights for scaling and adapting these approaches to other regions or population, creating a template for similar initiatives.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.003

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicIron Metabolism and Disorders→French-language works237,207→