ArticleScientific reports2025
Impact of facility based versus home based growth monitoring and promotion programs on child nutritional status in rural Bangladesh.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The delivery platform for growth monitoring and promotion (GMP) programs to improve child nutrition remains debated. This study compared the impact of facility-based plus non-governmental organization supported home-based GMP (FGMP + NGO-supported HGMP) versus facility-based GMP (FGMP) on child nutritional status in rural Bangladesh. Using a quasi-experimental design, 1,519 children aged 6-12 months were enrolled in each program and assessed at baseline and after 12 months. The primary outcome was linear growth (length-for-age Z-scores, LAZ), while secondary outcomes included weight-for-age (WAZ), weight-for-height (WHZ), stunting, wasting, and underweight prevalence, minimum dietary diversity, minimum meal frequency, and caregivers' complementary feeding practices. Child linear growth (Difference-in-difference, D-I-D: -4.5; 95% CI: -15.2, 6.1) and weight (D-I-D: -3.5; 95% CI: -11.7, 4.6) faltered in both groups, with no significant differences between the programs. Stunting (D-I-D: 2.8%; 95% CI: -1.3, 7.1) and wasting (D-I-D: 0.43%; 95% CI: -3.2, 4.1) prevalence increased equally across programs. Underweight prevalence rose more in FGMP + NGO-supported HGMP (D-I-D: 4.7%; 95% CI: 1.7,7.8) than in FGMP programs. Caregivers in FGMP areas showed slight improvements in complementary feeding practices (D-I-D: -1.4%; 95% CI:-6.5, 3.7) and significantly improved meal frequency (D-I-D: -4.7%; 95% CI: -9.1,-0.3). No significant differences were observed in minimum dietary diversity (D-I-D: -1.5%; 95% CI: -6.1, 3.1) or acceptable diet (D-I-D: -2.0%; 95% CI: -6.6, 2.6) between the programs. Findings highlight the need to strengthen both FGMP and FGMP + NGO-supported HGMP programs by actively engaging caregivers and incorporating the influential role of family members and local social networks, which appeared to have a stronger impact on child feeding practices than GMP providers.
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.