ReviewCampbell systematic reviews2021
Aquaculture for improving productivity, income, nutrition and women's empowerment in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Campbell systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Selective Reporting Biases in Studies Included in Campbell Systematic Reviews: A Systematic Review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- Phages for One Health: regulatory and product life cycle considerations.Microbiology (Reading, England) · 2026Review
- Antibiotic Resistance and Pathogenicity of Vibrio Species in Aquaculture: Implications for Fish Health and Food Safety in LMICs.Veterinary medicine and science · 2026Review
- Habitat-structured fungal mycobiomes at the water-gill interface of farmed red tilapia in Central Thailand: An internal transcribed spacer rRNA amplicon sequencing study.Veterinary world · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Automation in Evidence Synthesis: An Investigation of Methods Employed in Cochrane, Campbell Collaboration, and Environmental Evidence Reviews.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Interventions promoting resilience through climate smart agricultural practices for women farmers: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Review
- Whole Transcriptome Analysis of Differentially Expressed Genes in Cultured Nile Tilapia (Genes · 2023Article
- PROTOCOL: Interventions promoting resilience through climate-smart agricultural practices for women farmers: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Aquaculture for improving productivity, income, nutrition and women's empowerment in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Campbell systematic reviews · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A steady increase in the international production and consumption of fish has positioned aquaculture as a development option. Previous literature has highlighted the potential of aquaculture to improve economic, nutritional and gender equality outcomes, however, the evidence on the effectiveness of these programmes remains unclear. Objectives: The review assessed whether aquaculture interventions increase the productivity, income, nutrition, and women's empowerment of individuals. We additionally aimed to identify barriers and facilitators that could affect the effectiveness of these interventions, and the cost-effectiveness of such programmes. Methods: We searched for experimental and quasi-experimental studies focused on low- and middle-income countries. We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration for the data collection and analysis. Results: We identified 21 impact evaluations assessing the effect of 13 aquaculture interventions in low- and lower-middle income countries. Twelve of these studies have a high risk of bias. Aquaculture interventions lead to a small increase in the production value, income, total expenditures and food consumption of participants. The limited availability of evidence prevented us from assessing other nutritional and women's empowerment outcomes. We identified barriers and facilitators affecting the programmes' set up, the participation of beneficiaries, and the level of productive activities. Insufficient cost data hindered full comparisons across programmes. Conclusions: The review suggests a lack of rigorous evidence assessing the effectiveness of aquaculture programmes. Future research could focus on evaluating nutrition and women's empowerment impacts, promoting reporting standards, and the use of cost data to continue building quality evidence around aquaculture interventions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.