ReviewGlobal food security2025
Meta-analysis of the impacts of digital information interventions on agricultural development.
Review in Global food security, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital means of delivering advisory and other information services to small-scale agricultural producers are widely expected to expand the reach of extension and other information provision services while reducing costs. However, there is currently little evidence systematically quantifying these benefits. In this paper, we synthesize quantitative information on the impacts of digital information interventions, which may integrate human support, on adoption of modern farm inputs (fertilizer and improved seeds), yield, and income, covering interventions implemented between 2005 and 2019. Our starting point for the meta-analysis was the Agriculture in the Digital Age Evidence Gap Map dataset, which provided a consistent set of studies of digital interventions, though one limitation is that it excludes more recent studies published after 2021. After applying our criteria for relevance, rigor, and availability of necessary data, we used estimates from 20 studies in our analyses where fifteen were from Sub-Saharan Africa, four from India, and one from Cambodia. Mean impacts of digital information interventions on adoption of fertilizer (+23 %; 95 % CI +6 % to +40 %), yield (+6 %; +2 % to +9 %), and income (+6 %; +2 % to +9 %) are positive while effects on adoption of improved seeds were not statistically significant. Although our analysis indicates that digital farmer services have provided benefits on average, there is considerable variability in estimates across individual studies. However, there are not enough comparable quantitative observations from the literature included within our study population to reliably further disaggregate estimated impacts (e.g., by intervention, level of human assistance, geography, modality of information delivery, farmer type). Expansion of the available evidence base to facilitate quantification of these heterogeneous impacts is needed to better inform program design to maximize effectiveness.
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.