ArticlePLOS global public health2026
A pre-post pilot study with and without subsidy to promote improved backyard poultry-raising practices to reduce exposure to poultry and poultry feces in rural Bangladesh.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backyard poultry raising is common in rural Bangladesh and many households keep their poultry inside their houses at night. Compared to keeping poultry outside in sheds at night, this practice likely elevates children's exposure to poultry and poultry feces and associated enteric pathogens. We conducted a two-arm (subsidy and non-subsidy) pre-post pilot study. Households in both arms received the behavior change communication and counseling intervention. Households in the subsidy arm also received ~23 USD for the construction of an improved poultry shed for nighttime housing. We administered a household survey and spot-check at baseline (February 2020) and then after intervention implementation (January-February 2021) among 37 subsidy and 42 non-subsidy households to determine the impact of the intervention on 1) confining poultry in a shed outside of the house at night, 2) poultry feces management, and 3) hand washing with soap after contacting poultry and poultry feces. A secondary aim was to investigate the effectiveness of a monetary subsidy on encouraging poultry raisers to build an improved poultry night shed. At endline, 58% of all households had an improved poultry shed (87% of subsidy and 33% of non-subsidy households). The percentage of all households confining all of their poultry outside the house the previous night was significantly higher at endline (33%) compared to baseline (2.5%) (prevalence difference: 30 percentage points [pp]; 95% confidence interval: [19, 41]). More households (both arms) had no visible poultry feces piles inside the house compared to baseline (prevalence difference: 26pp [10, 41]). Our intervention effectively encouraged households to build poultry sheds, confine poultry outside of house at night, and maintain an indoor living space free of poultry feces. Future studies should assess if housing all poultry outside the house reduces children's exposure to poultry feces enough to mitigate health risks associated with poultry ownership.
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.