Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37025831›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

Cash transfers and human capital outcomes of children in LMICs: A systematic review using PRISMA.

Aurolipsa Das, Narayan Sethi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aurolipsa DasDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology Rourkela, Odisha, 769008, India.
Narayan SethiDepartment of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology Rourkela, Odisha, 769008, India.
National Institute of Technology Rourkela · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With an increasing shift towards cash transfers and the proposition of Universal Basic Income (UBI) as a policy alternative to replace the existing schemes, there has been a rising discussion about the success and failure associated with cash transfers. Therefore, this article carries out a systematic review using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) to draw inferences and generate evidences with respect to the influence of cash transfers on two aspects of human capital outcomes of children, viz., child health and nutrition, and educational outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Forty four studies were selected on the basis of a four-stage procedure that checked for identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion. The results indicate that majority of cash transfers based on conditionalities, like mandatory attendance in healthcare organisations and educational institutions, proved to be effective in the selected countries. While 7 studies (16%) showed no changes in the outcomes, 5 (11%) depicted negative impact and the rest (73%) presented a positive result. The selected studies suggest that a strong supply-side mechanism in place in LMICs, ensure functional and quality services at health centres and schools in the respective regions and reflect overwhelming outcomes. Furthermore, incentive design, anticipated termination, and supply-side interventions would be instrumental in avoiding a crisis or shock in the economic sense to recipient households.

Indexed as

Cash transfersChild healthEducationLow- and middle-income countriesMalnutritionSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37025831
PMCPMC10070658
OpenAlexW4360604270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.