Four-year follow-up to a home-visiting intervention to promote early childhood development and prevent family violence in rural Rwanda: the Sugira Muryango cluster randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sugira Muryango (SM) is a home-visiting intervention designed to promote early childhood development (ECD) and prevent violence in families with young children living in extreme poverty in rural Rwanda. METHODS: We present 4-year follow-up data collected in 2022 in n=1009 households (93%) from a cluster randomised trial. We compare outcomes in SM and usual care (UC) families using mixed-effect models. Results are reported as the average difference in change over time in the SM versus UC group for longitudinal outcomes and the average difference in SM versus UC groups for new outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with UC caregivers, caregivers who participated in SM report engaging in more stimulating interaction with their children (b=0.531; 95% CI: 0.468, 0.594) and are less likely to report use of harsh discipline (b=-0.189; 95% CI: -0.292, -0.087). The SM caregivers also provide more learning materials (b=0.218; 95% CI: 0.0219, 0.414), language stimulation (b=0.159; 95% CI: 0.080, 0.240), more varied interactions (b=147; 95% CI: 0.030, 0.260), fathers are reported to be more engaged in play (b=0.253; 95% CI: 0.039, 0.467) and SM households have better hygiene practices (b=0.189; 95% CI: 0.052, 0.326) compared with UC households. We do not observe treatment effects on children's cognitive outcomes, self-regulation or behavioural problems. There is a small negative association between SM and height-for-age (b=-0.038; 95% CI: -0.062, -0.012). CONCLUSIONS: SM resulted in changes in caregivers' behaviours to support children's health and development. Despite positive caregiver effects, we did not observe effects on child development or behavioural outcomes. Programme updates may be required to support children's continued cognitive growth. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02510313.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".