Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35365481›Full record

SynthesisBMJ global health2022

More evidence on cash transfers and child nutritional outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

James Manley, Harold Alderman, Ugo Gentilini

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Examining the Association Between Household Enrollment in theAsia-Pacific journal of public health · 2023
    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

3 authors.

James ManleyEconomics, Towson University, Towson, Maryland, USA jamesmanley32@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6099-257X
Harold AldermanPoverty, Health, and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Ugo GentiliniGlobal Lead for Social Assistance, Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice in the World Bank Group, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCash transfer (CT) programmes are an increasingly common approach to alleviate poverty and inequality and improving child health and nutrition, as well as supporting other goals such as education. Evidence indicates that CTs can be effective, but overall impacts are small in magnitude. This paper substantially updates the evidence base on the effectiveness of CTs and moderating factors.

methodsBuilding on a prior search done in 2018, we searched articles published between January 2018 and March 2021 using Agris, Econlit, Eldis, IBSS, IDEAS, IFPRI, Google Scholar, PubMed and World Bank databases. We included studies using quantitative impact evaluation methods of CTs with sample sizes over 300, targeted to households with children under 5 years conducted with clear counterfactuals in countries with gross domestic product below US$10 000 at baseline. We performed meta-analysis using random effects models to assess the impact of CT programme on selected child nutrition outcomes.

findingsOut of 1561 articles identified, 55 additional articles were eligible for inclusion for a total of 129 estimates. We find that CTs have significant although modest effects on height-for-age z-scores (HAZ) (0.024, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.044; p<0.02); stunting (-1.35%, 95% CI -2.35 to - 0.35; p<0;01); wasting (-1.31%, 95% CI -2.16% to 0.46%; p<0.01); animal-source foods (6.72%, 95% CI 5.24% to 8.20%; p<0.01); diet diversity (0.55, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.81; p<0.01) and diarrhoea incidence (- 1.74%, 95% CI -2.79% to -0.68%; p<0.05). There was no significant effect of CTs on weight-for-height (WHZ) or weight-for-age z-scores (WAZ). Well-targeted behaviour change communication was also effective in improving HAZ and decreasing the prevalence of diarrhoea.

interpretationCT programmes improved linear growth among young children, reducing wasting and stunting, but effects are heterogeneous and somewhat small overall. More evidence indicates that effects on dietary diversity and the consumption of animal-source foods are increasingly pronounced.

Indexed as

Growth DisordersNutritional StatusAnimalsChildChild Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaChild, PreschoolDietFamily CharacteristicsHumanschild healthhealth economicshealth policynutritionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35365481
PMCPMC8977747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.