Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35687367›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of nutrition2022

Economic Evaluation of Nutrition-Sensitive Agricultural Interventions to Increase Maternal and Child Dietary Diversity and Nutritional Status in Rural Odisha, India.

Hassan Haghparast-Bidgoli, Helen Harris-Fry, Abhinav Kumar, Ronali Pradhan, Naba Kishore Mishra, Shibananth Padhan, Amit Kumar Ojha, Sailendra Narayan Mishra, Emily Fivian, Philip James and 16 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

26 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Hassan Haghparast-BidgoliUniversity College London, Institute for Global Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6365-2944
Helen Harris-FryLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2367-908X
Abhinav KumarDigital Green, New Delhi, India.
Ronali PradhanDigital Green, New Delhi, India.
Naba Kishore MishraVoluntary Association for Rural Reconstruction and Appropriate Technology (VARRAT), Kendrapada, Odisha, India.
Shibananth PadhanVoluntary Association for Rural Reconstruction and Appropriate Technology (VARRAT), Kendrapada, Odisha, India.
Amit Kumar OjhaEkjut, Chakradharpur, Jharkhand, India.
Sailendra Narayan MishraVoluntary Association for Rural Reconstruction and Appropriate Technology (VARRAT), Kendrapada, Odisha, India.
Emily FivianLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9621-2504
Philip JamesLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Sarah FergusonDevoted Health, Waltham, MA, USA.
Sneha KrishnanJindal School of Environment and Sustainability, OP Jindal Global University and ETCH Consultancy Services, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Meghan O'HearnTufts University Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Boston, MA, USA.
Tom PalmerUniversity College London, Institute for Global Health, London, United Kingdom.
Peggy Koniz-BooherSI Research & Training Institute, Inc. Arlington, VA, USA.
Heather DantonSI Research & Training Institute, Inc. Arlington, VA, USA.
Sandee MinoviSI Research & Training Institute, Inc. Arlington, VA, USA.
Satyanarayan MohantyDCOR Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Bhubaneshwar, India.
Shibanand RathEkjut, Chakradharpur, Jharkhand, India.
Suchitra RathEkjut, Chakradharpur, Jharkhand, India.
Nirmala NairEkjut, Chakradharpur, Jharkhand, India.
Prasanta TripathyEkjut, Chakradharpur, Jharkhand, India.
Audrey ProstUniversity College London, Institute for Global Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6121-8132
Elizabeth AllenLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2689-6939
Jolene SkordisUniversity College London, Institute for Global Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8633-0208
Suneetha KadiyalaLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Ekjut · INLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBProgram for Appropriate Technology in Health · INSociological Initiatives Foundation · USUniversity College London · GBBH Consulting (Ireland) · IEO. P. Jindal Global University · INTufts University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEconomic evaluations of nutrition-sensitive agriculture (NSA) interventions are scarce, limiting assessment of their potential affordability and scalability.

objectivesWe conducted cost-consequence analyses of 3 participatory video-based interventions of fortnightly women's group meetings using the following platforms: 1) NSA videos; 2) NSA and nutrition-specific videos; or 3) NSA videos with a nutrition-specific participatory learning and action (PLA) cycle.

methodsInterventions were tested in a 32-mo, 4-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial, Upscaling Participatory Action and Videos for Agriculture and Nutrition (UPAVAN) in the Keonjhar district, Odisha, India. Impacts were evaluated in children aged 0-23 mo and their mothers. We estimated program costs using data collected prospectively from expenditure records of implementing and technical partners and societal costs using expenditure assessment data collected from households with a child aged 0-23 mo and key informant interviews. Costs were adjusted for inflation, discounted, and converted to 2019 US$.

resultsTotal program costs of each intervention ranged from US$272,121 to US$386,907. Program costs per pregnant woman or mother of a child aged 0-23 mo were US$62 for NSA videos, US$84 for NSA and nutrition-specific videos, and US$78 for NSA videos with PLA (societal costs: US$125, US$143, and US$122, respectively). Substantial shares of total costs were attributable to development and delivery of the videos and PLA (52-69%) and quality assurance (25-41%). Relative to control, minimum dietary diversity was higher in the children who underwent the interventions incorporating nutrition-specific videos and PLA (adjusted RRs: 1.19 and 1.27; 95% CIs: 1.03-1.37 and 1.11, 1.46, respectively). Relative to control, minimum dietary diversity in mothers was higher in those who underwent NSA video (1.21 [1.01, 1.45]) and NSA with PLA (1.30 [1.10, 1.53]) interventions.

conclusionNSA videos with PLA can increase both maternal and child dietary diversity and have the lowest cost per unit increase in diet diversity. Building on investments made in developing UPAVAN, cost-efficiency at scale could be increased with less intensive monitoring, reduced startup costs, and integration within existing government programs. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as ISRCTN65922679.

Indexed as

DietNutritional StatusAgricultureChildCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansIndiaPolyestersPregnancyPolyestersCost–consequence analysisDietary diversityIndiaMaternal and child nutritionNutrition-sensitive agricultureParticipatory learning and actionWomen's groups

Identifiers

PMID35687367
PMCPMC9535442
OpenAlexW4281773216

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.