Effects of an agricultural intervention on psychosocial health among pregnant and nonpregnant women with HIV in Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We examined whether effects of an agricultural livelihood intervention on food insecurity and psychosocial outcomes remained robust in pregnant compared to nonpregnant women living with HIV, and whether potentially negative associations between pregnancy and these outcomes were alleviated by the intervention. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the Shamba Maisha cluster-randomized controlled trial ( N = 396 women; NCT02815579). The intervention included agribusiness training and supplies. METHODS: Food insecure women with HIV in Kenya were followed for 24 months between 2016 and 2019. Food insecurity, empowerment, social support, depression, HIV stigma, and intimate partner violence were collected at all visits. We estimated the effect of the intervention on trends for each outcome via mixed-effects regression, separately for women who did and did not become pregnant during follow-up, and whether trends differed by pregnancy status, separately by arm and adjusted for demographic factors. RESULTS: In comparison to controls, the intervention was associated with a greater decline in food insecurity among women who became pregnant (3.35 points, 95% confidence interval (CI): -5.63, -1.06) and who did not become pregnant (3.43 points, 95% CI: -4.34, -2.52). Effects on psychosocial outcomes were also comparable in pregnant and nonpregnant women. Having an incident pregnancy was associated with disempowerment among controls (difference in trend -0.22, 95% CI -0.44, -0.00) but not in the intervention arm. CONCLUSIONS: We observed comparable benefits of an agricultural livelihood intervention on food security and psychosocial outcomes regardless of pregnancy status. Agricultural livelihood interventions may hold promise for improving pregnancy outcomes through improved maternal food security.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".