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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.015 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".