↓ Skip to main content

A community-based cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of different bundles of nutrition-specific interventions in improving mean length-for-age z score among children at…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
393 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A community-based cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of different bundles of nutrition-specific interventions in improving mean length-for-age z score among children at 24 months of age in rural Bangladesh: study protocol
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4281-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sk Masum Billah, Tarana E. Ferdous, Mohd Anisul Karim, Michael J. Dibley, Shahreen Raihana, Md Moinuddin, Nuzhat Choudhury, Tahmeed Ahmed, D. M. Emdadul Hoque, Purnima Menon, Shams El Arifeen

Abstract

Prevalence of stunting among under-five children in Bangladesh is 36%, varying with geographic and socio-economic characteristics. Previously, research groups statistically modelled the effect of 10 individual nutrition-specific interventions targeting the critical first 1000 days of life from conception, on lives saved and costs incurred in countries with the highest burden of stunted children. However, primary research on the combined effects of these interventions is limited. Our study directly addresses this gap by examining the effect of combinations of 5 preventive interventions on length-for-age z-scores (LAZ) among 2-years old children. This community-based cluster randomised trial (c-RCT) compares 4 intervention combinations against one comparison arm. Intervention combinations are: 1) Behaviour change communication (BCC) on maternal nutrition during pregnancy, exclusive breastfeeding, and complementary feeding, along with prenatal nutritional supplement (PNS) and complementary food supplement (CFS); 2) BCC with PNS; 3) BCC with CFS; and 4) BCC alone. The comparison arm receives only routine health and nutrition services. From a rural district, 125 clusters were selected and randomly assigned to any one of the five study arms by block randomisation. A bespoke automated tab-based system was developed linking data collection, intervention delivery and project supervision. Total sample size is 1500 pregnant women, with minimum 1050 resultant children expected to be retained, powered to detect a difference of at least 0.4 in the mean LAZ score of children at 24 months, the main outcome variable, between the comparison arm and each intervention arm. Length and other anthropometric measurements, nutritional intake and other relevant data on mother and children are being collected during enrolment, twice during pregnancy, postpartum monthly till 6 months, and every third month thereafter till 24 months. This c-RCT explores the effectiveness of bundles of preventive nutrition intervention approaches addressing the critical window of opportunity to mitigate childhood stunting. The results will provide robust evidence as to which bundle(s) can have significant effect on linear growth of children. Our study also will have policy-level implications for prioritising intervention(s) tackling stunting. The study was retrospectively registered on May 2, 2016 and is available online at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT02768181 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 393 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 393 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 13%
Student > Bachelor 39 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 8%
Researcher 30 8%
Lecturer 22 6%
Other 56 14%
Unknown 163 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 88 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 56 14%
Social Sciences 22 6%
Psychology 15 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 2%
Other 36 9%
Unknown 169 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,467,628
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,423
of 14,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,783
of 310,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#195
of 233 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,971 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 233 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.