ArticleDigital health
Added value of video edutainment on android handsets in home visits to improve maternal and child health in Bauchi State, Nigeria: Secondary analysis from a cluster randomised controlled trial.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A trial of evidence-based health promotion home visits to pregnant women and their spouses in northern Nigeria found significant improvements in maternal and child health outcomes. This study tested the added value for these outcomes of including video edutainment in the visits. Methods: In total, 19,718 households in three randomly allocated intervention wards (administrative areas) received home visits including short videos on android handsets to spark discussion about local risk factors for maternal and child health; 16,751 households in three control wards received visits with only verbal discussion about risk factors. We compared outcomes between wards with and without videos in the visits, calculating the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of differences, in bivariate and then multivariate analysis adjusting for socio-economic differences between the video and non-video wards. Results: Pregnant women from video wards were more likely than those from non-video wards to have discussed pregnancy and childbirth often with their husbands (OR 2.22, 95%CI 1.07-4.59). Male spouses in video wards were more likely to know to give more fluids and continued feeding to a child with diarrhoea (OR 1.61, 95%CI 1.21-2.13). For most outcomes there was no significant difference between video and non-video wards. The home visitors who shared videos considered they helped pregnant women and their spouses to appreciate the information about risk factors. Conclusion: The lack of added value of the videos in the context of a research study may reflect the intensive training of home visitors and the effective evidence-based discussions included in all the visits. Further research could rollout routine home visits with and without videos and test the impact of video edutainment added to home visits carried out in a routine service context.
Indexed as
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.