MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415915406 · doi:10.1111/mcn.70135

PS‐SAM: A Mixed Methods Study to Understand Current Practice and the Facilitators and Barriers to the Utilisation of Psycho‐Social Stimulation Interventions in Severe Acute Malnutrition

2025· article· en· W4415915406 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mike Kalmus Eliasz, Damni Advani, Melissa Gladstone

Bibliographic record

VenueMaternal and Child Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
KeywordsPsychological interventionRespondentMalnutritionImplementation researchIntervention (counseling)Acute careMEDLINEGlobe

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psycho-social stimulation interventions, recommended in the WHO guidelines for severe acute malnutrition (SAM), have been demonstrated to improve neurodevelopment and growth. However, interventions which have proven effective in clinical trials are resource-intensive and may be challenging in many contexts. This study aimed to explore facilitators, barriers and the existing provision of psycho-social stimulation interventions. We undertook a survey targeting practitioners across the globe who are involved in SAM care and/or programme management. We then undertook 12 semi-structured key informant interviews with practitioners from diverse professional contexts. We transcribed and coded interviews using a deductive approach based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science Research (CFIR). We gained 42 responses from 18 countries for our survey with 29 respondents including psycho-social stimulation interventions in their SAM programmes. Our 12 key informant interviews described several barriers (financial, physical, and human resource limitations, prioritisation of life-saving care, and staff beliefs) as well as some potential facilitators (inclusion in guidelines, enjoyment for staff and parents, and emerging evidence of benefits in terms of short and long-term outcomes). This multi-country mixed methods study revealed that there are very heterogeneous patterns around the implementation of psycho-social interventions in children with SAM. Our study has demonstrated the perceived challenges by professionals involved in SAM care of the feasibility of implementing interventions from research trials. Pragmatic studies are needed which also include an assessment of implementation to enhance an understanding of what might drive uptake. Limitations of our study include a potential respondent bias and small sample size.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaternal and Child NutritionSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207