Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26700866›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2015

The REFANI-N study protocol: a cluster-randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early initiation and longer duration of emergency/seasonal unconditional cash transfers for the prevention of acute malnutrition among children, 6-59 months, in Tahoua, Niger.

Victoria L Sibson, Carlos S Grijalva-Eternod, Leila Bourahla, Hassan Haghparast-Bidgoli, Joanna Morrison, Chloe Puett, Lani Trenouth, Andrew Seal

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Victoria L SibsonUCL Institute for Global Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. victoria.sibson@ucl.ac.uk.
Carlos S Grijalva-EternodUCL Institute for Global Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. c.eternod@ucl.ac.uk.
Leila BourahlaConcern Worldwide, Niamey, Niger. leila.bourahla@concern.net.
Hassan Haghparast-BidgoliUCL Institute for Global Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. h.haghparast-bidgoli@ucl.ac.uk.
Joanna MorrisonUCL Institute for Global Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. joanna.morrison@ucl.ac.uk.
Chloe PuettAction Against Hunger, New York, USA. cpuett@actionagainsthunger.org.
Lani TrenouthAction Against Hunger, New York, USA. ltrenouth@actionagainsthunger.org.
Andrew SealUCL Institute for Global Health, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. a.seal@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe global burden of acute malnutrition among children remains high, and prevalence rates are highest in humanitarian contexts such as Niger. Unconditional cash transfers are increasingly used to prevent acute malnutrition in emergencies but lack a strong evidence base. In Niger, non-governmental organisations give unconditional cash transfers to the poorest households from June to September; the 'hunger gap'. However, rising admissions to feeding programmes from March/April suggest the intervention may be late. METHODS/

designThis cluster-randomised controlled trial will compare two types of unconditional cash transfer for 'very poor' households in 'vulnerable' villages defined and identified by the implementing organisation. 3,500 children (6-59 months) and 2,500 women (15-49 years) will be recruited exhaustively from households targeted for cash and from a random sample of non-recipient households in 40 villages in Tahoua district. Clusters of villages with a common cash distribution point will be assigned to either a control group which will receive the standard intervention (n = 10), or a modified intervention group (n = 10). The standard intervention is 32,500 FCFA/month for 4 months, June to September, given cash-in-hand to female representatives of 'very poor' households. The modified intervention is 21,500 FCFA/month for 5 months, April, May, July, August, September, and 22,500 FCFA in June, providing the same total amount. In both arms the recipient women attend an education session, women and children are screened and referred for acute malnutrition treatment, and the households receive nutrition supplements for children 6-23 months and pregnant and lactating women. The trial will evaluate whether the modified unconditional cash transfer leads to a reduction in acute malnutrition among children 6-59 months old compared to the standard intervention. The sample size provides power to detect a 5 percentage point difference in prevalence of acute malnutrition between trial arms. Quantitative and qualitative process evaluation data will be prospectively collected and programme costs will be collected and cost-effectiveness ratios calculated. DISCUSSION: This randomised study design with a concurrent process evaluation will provide evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of earlier initiation of seasonal unconditional cash transfer for the prevention of acute malnutrition, which will be generalisable to similar humanitarian situations.

trial registrationISRCTN25360839, registered March 19, 2015.

Indexed as

AdultChildChild Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaChild, PreschoolChild WelfareDietary SupplementsEmergenciesFamily CharacteristicsFemaleGovernment ProgramsHumansInfantMalnutritionMiddle AgedNigerPoverty

Identifiers

PMID26700866
PMCPMC4690269

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.