Theory-Driven Process Evaluation of a Complementary Feeding Trial in Four Countries

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Theory-Driven Process Evaluation of a Complementary Feeding Trial in Four Countries
Language: English
Authors: Newman, Jamie E., Garces, Ana, Mazariegos, Manolo, Hambidge, K. Michael, Manasyan, Albert, Tshefu, Antoinette, Lokangaka, Adrien, Sami, Neelofar, Carlo, Waldemar A., Bose, Carl L., Pasha, Omrana, Goco, Norman, Chomba, Elwyn, Goldenberg, Robert L., Wright, Linda L., Koso-Thomas, Marion, Krebs, Nancy F.
Source: Health Education Research. Apr 2014 29(2):297-305.
Availability: Oxford University Press. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Tel: +44-1865-353907; Fax: +44-1865-353485; e-mail: jnls.cust.serv@oxfordjournals.org; Web site: http://her.oxfordjournals.org/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 9
Publication Date: 2014
Sponsoring Agency: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (NIH)
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (NIH)
Contract Number: HD040657
HD043464
HD043475
HD040636
9K24 DK083772
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Comparative Analysis, Food, Infants, Child Development, Cross Cultural Studies, Statistical Analysis, Interviews, Caregivers, Intervention, Nutrition, Regression (Statistics), Correlation, Child Health, Human Body
Geographic Terms: Congo, Guatemala, Pakistan, Zambia
DOI: 10.1093/her/cyt115
ISSN: 0268-1153
Abstract: We conducted a theory-driven process evaluation of a cluster randomized controlled trial comparing two types of complementary feeding (meat versus fortified cereal) on infant growth in Guatemala, Pakistan, Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. We examined process evaluation indicators for the entire study cohort (N = 1236) using chi-square tests to examine differences between treatment groups. We administered exit interviews to 219 caregivers and 45 intervention staff to explore why caregivers may or may not have performed suggested infant feeding behaviors. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between caregiver scores and infant linear growth velocity. As message recall increased, irrespective of treatment group, linear growth velocity increased when controlling for other factors (P < 0.05), emphasizing the importance of study messages. Our detailed process evaluation revealed few differences between treatment groups, giving us confidence that the main trial's lack of effect to reverse the progression of stunting cannot be explained by differences between groups or inconsistencies in protocol implementation. These findings add to an emerging body of literature suggesting limited impact on stunting of interventions initiated during the period of complementary feeding in impoverished environments. The early onset and steady progression support the provision of earlier and comprehensive interventions.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 20
Entry Date: 2015
Accession Number: EJ1064559
Database: ERIC
Description
Abstract:We conducted a theory-driven process evaluation of a cluster randomized controlled trial comparing two types of complementary feeding (meat versus fortified cereal) on infant growth in Guatemala, Pakistan, Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. We examined process evaluation indicators for the entire study cohort (N = 1236) using chi-square tests to examine differences between treatment groups. We administered exit interviews to 219 caregivers and 45 intervention staff to explore why caregivers may or may not have performed suggested infant feeding behaviors. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between caregiver scores and infant linear growth velocity. As message recall increased, irrespective of treatment group, linear growth velocity increased when controlling for other factors (P < 0.05), emphasizing the importance of study messages. Our detailed process evaluation revealed few differences between treatment groups, giving us confidence that the main trial's lack of effect to reverse the progression of stunting cannot be explained by differences between groups or inconsistencies in protocol implementation. These findings add to an emerging body of literature suggesting limited impact on stunting of interventions initiated during the period of complementary feeding in impoverished environments. The early onset and steady progression support the provision of earlier and comprehensive interventions.
ISSN:0268-1153
DOI:10.1093/her/cyt115