Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26681704›Full record

Trial reportGlobal health, science and practice2015

Behavior Change After 20 Months of a Radio Campaign Addressing Key Lifesaving Family Behaviors for Child Survival: Midline Results From a Cluster Randomized Trial in Rural Burkina Faso.

Sophie Sarrassat, Nicolas Meda, Moctar Ouedraogo, Henri Some, Robert Bambara, Roy Head, Joanna Murray, Pieter Remes, Simon Cousens

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Global health, science and practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sophie SarrassatCentre for Maternal Adolescent Reproductive and Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Nicolas MedaCentre Muraz, Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso.
Moctar OuedraogoAfricsanté, Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso.
Henri SomeAfricsanté, Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso.
Robert BambaraDirection Générale des Études et des Statistiques Sectorielles (DGESS), Ministère de la Santé, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Roy HeadDevelopment Media International, London, UK.
Joanna MurrayDevelopment Media International, London, UK.
Pieter RemesDevelopment Media International, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Simon CousensCentre for Maternal Adolescent Reproductive and Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 091367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Burkina Faso, a comprehensive 35-month radio campaign addressed key, multiple family behaviors for improving under-5 child survival and was evaluated using a repeated cross-sectional, cluster randomized design. The primary outcome of the trial was postneonatal under-5 child mortality. This paper reports on behavior change achieved at midline.

methodFourteen community radio stations in 14 geographic areas were selected based on their high listenership. Seven areas were randomly allocated to receive the intervention while the other 7 areas served as controls. The campaign was launched in March 2012. Cross-sectional surveys of about 5,000 mothers of under-5 children, living in villages close to the radio stations, were conducted at baseline (from December 2011 to February 2012) and at midline (in November 2013), after 20 months of campaigning. Statistical analyses were based on cluster-level summaries using a difference-in-difference (DiD) approach and adjusted for imbalances between arms at baseline. In addition, routine health facility data were analyzed for evidence of changes in health facility utilization.

resultsAt midline, 75% of women in the intervention arm reported recognizing radio spots from the campaign. There was some evidence of the campaign having positive effects on care seeking for diarrhea (adjusted DiD, 17.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5 to 32.5; P= .03), antibiotic treatment for fast/difficult breathing (adjusted DiD, 29.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.5 to 55.7; P= .03), and saving money during pregnancy (adjusted DiD, 12.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.4 to 24.2; P= .03). For other target behaviors, there was little or no evidence of an impact of the campaign after adjustment for baseline imbalances and confounding factors. There was weak evidence of a positive correlation between the intensity of broadcasting of messages and reported changes in target behaviors. Routine health facility data were consistent with a greater increase in the intervention arm than in the control arm in all-cause under-5 consultations (33% versus 17%, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant (P= .40).

conclusionThe radio campaign reached a high proportion of the primary target population, but the evidence for an impact on key child survival-related behaviors at midline was mixed.

Indexed as

Child HealthCommunicationDeveloping CountriesHealth BehaviorMothersRadioAdultBurkina FasoChildChild MortalityChild, PreschoolDiarrheaFemaleHealth PromotionHumansInfant

Identifiers

PMID26681704
PMCPMC4682582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.