ArticleScientific reports2025
A methodological framework for assessing development solutions: application to wood fuel challenges in Nigeria.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Development interventions often yield co-benefits and trade-offs across multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, current approaches typically assess progress towards specific SDG targets, such as increasing access to clean energy or improving health outcomes, rather than evaluating the co-benefits and trade-offs of the solutions used to achieve these targets. This study introduces a solutions-oriented methodology to assess the impacts of development solutions, applied to the case of wood fuel cooking-related challenges in Nigeria. Using a rapid evidence assessment and stakeholder workshop, we identify co-benefits, trade-offs, and barriers associated with 13 wood fuel-related solutions, classified into three types: enhancing fuelwood availability, adopting alternative technologies, and implementing external interventions. We find solutions that increase wood fuel availability can address environmental and social issues, but not health challenges, while alternative fuels/technologies face affordability, market, and cultural acceptance barriers. We highlight data limitations and propose an iterative process to comprehensively evaluate solutions' impacts. This process facilitates context-specific, cross-sectoral planning but underscores that no universal solution exists. Successful interventions require multi-sector collaboration, public education, and strengthened governance to balance competing priorities and ensure equitable outcomes. By advancing solutions-based approaches, this study contributes to integrating SDG interactions into practical, evidence-informed policy and programming.
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.