MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414371057 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuaf171

Effectiveness of Financial Relief Interventions for the Prevention of Wasting in Children Up to 5 Years at Risk of Wasting and Nutritional Oedema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· article· en· W4414371057 on OpenAlexaff
Rehana A Salam, Komal Abdul Rahim, Zahra Ali Padhani, Anna Alı̀, Jai K Das, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Zohra S Lassi

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsWastingPsychological interventionWasting SyndromeMEDLINEMalnutrition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Childhood malnutrition persists at alarming rates globally despite the existing preventative and therapeutic evidence-based interventions. Various financial relief strategies such as cash transfers and food vouchers have been evaluated for their effectiveness in improving access to and quality of effective interventions for improving the nutritional status of children. OBJECTIVE: In this review, we aimed to assess the impact of community-based financial relief interventions to prevent wasting among children up to 5 years at risk of wasting and nutritional oedema. DATA SOURCES: We searched 9 databases from database conception until April 13, 2023, and included 5 studies (10 articles) evaluating the impact of community-based financial relief interventions for preventing wasting among children up to 5 years. DATA EXTRACTION: Two review authors independently extracted data, and discrepancies were resolved through discussion until consensus or by consulting a third reviewer if required. DATA ANALYSIS: Three studies assessed the impact of conditional cash transfers; 2 studies evaluated unconditional cash transfers, and 1 study assessed the impact of food vouchers. We found that the impact of conditional cash transfers on the prevalence of wasting, weight-for-height z score (WHZ), weight-for-age z score, and underweight is uncertain; however these cash transfers probably reduce the prevalence of severe wasting (odds ratio [OR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.0; 1 study; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation [GRADE]: moderate certainty evidence). The impacts of unconditional standard cash provision on the prevalence of wasting and severe wasting are uncertain; however, unconditional double-cash provisions may reduce wasting with little or no impact on severe wasting, WHZ, and mid-upper arm circumference. For food vouchers, the evidence suggests an uncertain impact on the prevalence of wasting and severe wasting. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the effectiveness of community-based financial relief interventions in preventing wasting among children is scarce. Some positive impact of conditional cash transfers and unconditional double cash provision on the prevalence of wasting has been demonstrated; however, relative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability need further exploration. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration No. CRD42021277429.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.352
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207