Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27756263›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2016

Type and extent of trans-disciplinary co-operation to improve food security, health and household environment in low and middle income countries: systematic review.

Santosh Gaihre, Janet Kyle, Sean Semple, Jo Smith, Madhu Subedi, Debbi Marais

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Santosh GaihreDivision of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Room 1.019 Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK. santosh.gaihre@abdn.ac.uk.
Janet KyleDivision of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Room 1.019 Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Sean SempleDivision of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Room 1.019 Polwarth Building, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK.
Jo SmithSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Madhu SubediSave the Children, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Debbi MaraisWMS- Health Education, The University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough linkages have been found between agricultural interventions and nutritional health, and the development of clean fuels and improved solid fuel stoves in reducing household air pollution and adverse health effects, the extent of the potential of combined household interventions to improve health, nutrition and the environment has not been investigated. A systematic review was conducted to identify the extent and type of community-based agricultural and household interventions aimed at improving food security, health and the household environment in low and middle income countries.

methodsA systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases was performed. Key search words were generated reflecting the "participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes and study design" approach and a comprehensive search strategy was developed following "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" recommendations. Any community-based agricultural and/or household interventions were eligible for inclusion if the focus was to improve at least one of the outcome measures of interest. All relevant study designs employing any of these interventions (alone/in combination) were included if conducted in Low and middle income countries. Review articles, and clinical and occupational studies were excluded.

resultsA total of 123 studies were included and grouped into four intervention domains; agricultural (n = 27), air quality (n = 34), water quality (n = 32), and nutritional (n = 30). Most studies were conducted in Asia (39.2 %) or Africa (34.6 %) with the remaining 26.1 % in Latin America. Very few studies (n = 11) combined interventions across more than one domain. The majority of agricultural and nutritional studies were conducted in Africa and Asia, whereas the majority of interventions to improve household air quality were conducted in Latin America.

conclusionsIt is clear that very little trans-disciplinary research has been done with the majority of studies still being discipline specific. It also appears that certain low and middle income countries seem to focus on domain-specific interventions. The review emphasizes the need to develop holistic, cross-domain intervention packages. Further investigation of the data is being conducted to determine the effectiveness of these interventions and whether interdisciplinary interventions provide greater benefit than those that address single health or community problems.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesFamily CharacteristicsIncomeNutritional StatusAfricaAir Pollution, IndoorAsiaEnvironmental ExposureFood SupplyHousehold ArticlesHumansRisk AssessmentAgricultureFood securityHealthHousehold air pollutionInterventionNutritionWater quality

Identifiers

PMID27756263
PMCPMC5070145

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.