Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32443977›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2020

The evaluation of Suchana, a large-scale development program to prevent chronic undernutrition in north-eastern Bangladesh.

Nuzhat Choudhury, Mohammad Jyoti Raihan, S M Tanvir Ahmed, Kazi Eliza Islam, Vanessa Self, Shahed Rahman, Lilly Schofield, Andrew Hall, Tahmeed Ahmed

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Food security status ofFrontiers in public health · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Nuzhat ChoudhuryNutrition and Clinical Services Division, icddrb, 68 Shaheed Tajuddin Ahmed Sarani, Mohakhali, Dhaka, 1212, Bangladesh. nuzhat@icddrb.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8345-5278
Mohammad Jyoti RaihanNutrition and Clinical Services Division, icddrb, 68 Shaheed Tajuddin Ahmed Sarani, Mohakhali, Dhaka, 1212, Bangladesh.
S M Tanvir AhmedSave the Children Bangladesh, House CWN (A) 35, Road 43, Gulshan, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Kazi Eliza IslamSave the Children Bangladesh, House CWN (A) 35, Road 43, Gulshan, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Vanessa SelfSave the Children U.K., 1 St John's Lane, London, EC1M 4AR, UK.
Shahed RahmanSave the Children Bangladesh, House CWN (A) 35, Road 43, Gulshan, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Lilly SchofieldSave the Children U.K., 1 St John's Lane, London, EC1M 4AR, UK.
Andrew HallSave the Children U.K., 1 St John's Lane, London, EC1M 4AR, UK.
Tahmeed AhmedNutrition and Clinical Services Division, icddrb, 68 Shaheed Tajuddin Ahmed Sarani, Mohakhali, Dhaka, 1212, Bangladesh.
Save the Children · BDSave the Children · GBInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research · BDDurham University · GB

Funding

UKAid 01368
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence of the impact of community-based nutrition programs is uncommon for two main reasons: the lack of untreated controls, and implementation does not account for the evaluation design. Suchana is a large-scale program to prevent malnutrition in children in Sylhet division, Bangladesh by improving the livelihoods and nutrition knowledge of poor and very poor households. Suchana is being implemented in 157 unions, the smallest administrative unit of government, in two districts of Sylhet. Suchana will deliver a package of interventions to poor people in about 40 randomly selected new unions annually over 4 years, until all are covered. All beneficiaries will receive the normal government nutrition services. For evaluation purposes the last 40 unions will act as a control for the first 40 intervention unions. The remaining unions will receive the program but will not take part in the evaluation. A baseline survey was conducted in both intervention and control unions; it will be repeated after 3 years to estimate the impact on the prevalence of stunted children and other indicators. This stepped wedge design has several advantages for both the implementation and evaluation of services, as well as some disadvantages. The units of delivery are randomized, which controls for other influences on outcomes; the program supports government service delivery systems, so it is replicable and scalable; and the program can be improved over time as lessons are learned. The main disadvantages are the difficulty of estimating the impact of each component of the program, and the geographical distribution of unions, which increases program delivery costs. Stepped implementation allows a cluster randomized trial to be achieved within a large-scale poverty alleviation program and phased-in and scaled-up over a period of time. This paper may encourage evaluators to consider how to estimate attributable impact by using stepped implementation, which allows the counterfactual group eventually to be treated.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesHealth PromotionAdolescentAdultBangladeshChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornInfant Nutrition DisordersMaleMiddle AgedPregnancyProgram EvaluationYoung AdultMalnutritionNutritional program evaluationRandomized controlled trialStepped wedge design

Identifiers

PMID32443977
PMCPMC7245033
OpenAlexW3026668592

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.