Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36193041›Full record

ArticleWorld development2022

Impact of a homestead food production program on women's empowerment: Pro-WEAI results from the FAARM trial in Bangladesh.

Jillian L Waid, Amanda S Wendt, Sheela S Sinharoy, Abdul Kader, Sabine Gabrysch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World development, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

5 authors.

Jillian L WaidResearch Department 2, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, Germany.
Amanda S WendtResearch Department 2, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, Germany.
Sheela S SinharoyHubert Department of Global Health and Gangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abdul KaderBangladesh Country Office, Helen Keller International, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Sabine GabryschResearch Department 2, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, Potsdam, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nutrition-sensitive agricultural programs have the potential to improve women's and children's nutrition, along with women's empowerment. The project-level Women's Empowerment in Agriculture Index (pro-WEAI) aims to standardize the measurement of women's agency and enable the assessment of impact over typical project timelines. Within the Food and Agricultural Approaches to Reducing Malnutrition (FAARM) cluster-randomized controlled trial in rural Habiganj, Sylhet, Bangladesh, we examined quantitative pro-WEAI data collected from a subsample of trial participants and their husbands (n = 885) approximately four months after the end of the intervention. We evaluated the impact of a three-year homestead food production program on men's and women's agency separately by pro-WEAI domain and indicator, using multilevel logistic and linear regression. We show that women in the FAARM intervention group had levels of agency similar to men and much higher than women in the control group (Odds Ratio [OR] 7.7, p < 0.001), corresponding to better gender equity in intervention areas (OR 3.5, p < 0.001). The higher levels of agency among intervention women were driven by greater intrinsic and collective agency but not by instrumental agency. Compared to controls, more women in the intervention group found intimate partner violence unacceptable (OR 3.5, p < 0.001), had greater ownership of assets (OR 2.6, p = 0.001), better control of income (OR 1.8, p = 0.042), higher levels of group membership (OR 14.0, p < 0.001), and membership in groups they considered influential (OR 166.8, p < 0.001). Self-efficacy was greater in intervention areas for both women (OR 3.2, p < 0.001) and men (OR 2.3, p = 0.002). Our results contribute to the development of benchmarks for interpreting pro-WEAI scores across programs. Our assessment of the impact of a homestead food production program on women's agency provides additional rationale for women-led agricultural projects. We plan to build on these findings by examining the role of improved women's agency on the pathway from the intervention to nutritional impacts.

Indexed as

3DE, Three domains of empowermentAgencyAgricultureDHS, Demographic and Health SurveyFAARM, Food and Agricultural Approaches to Reducing MalnutritionGAAP2, Gender, Agriculture, and Assets Project–Phase 2Gender equityGPI, Gender Parity IndexHomestead food productionIFPRI, International Food Policy Research InstituteODK, Open Data KitOR, Odds Ratiopro-WEAI, project-level Women's Empowerment in Agriculture IndexRCT, Randomized controlled trialSDG, Sustainable Development GoalSelf-efficacyWEAI, Women's Empowerment in Agriculture IndexWomen’s groups

Identifiers

PMID36193041
PMCPMC9351289

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.