↓ Skip to main content

The impact of integrated prevention and treatment on child malnutrition and health: the PROMIS project, a randomized control trial in Burkina Faso and Mali

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
206 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
The impact of integrated prevention and treatment on child malnutrition and health: the PROMIS project, a randomized control trial in Burkina Faso and Mali
Published in
BMC Public Health, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4146-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lieven Huybregts, Elodie Becquey, Amanda Zongrone, Agnes Le Port, Regina Khassanova, Lazare Coulibaly, Jef L. Leroy, Rahul Rawat, Marie T. Ruel

Abstract

Evidence suggests that both preventive and curative nutrition interventions are needed to tackle child acute malnutrition (AM) in developing countries. In addition to reducing the incidence of AM, providing preventive interventions may also help increase attendance (and coverage) of AM screening, a major constraint in the community-based management of child acute malnutrition (CMAM) model. There is a paucity of evidence-based strategies to deliver integrated preventive and curative interventions effectively and affordably at scale. The aim of the Innovative Approaches for the Prevention of Childhood Malnutrition (PROMIS) study is to assess the feasibility, quality of implementation, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an integrated child malnutrition prevention and treatment intervention package implemented through a community-based platform in Mali and a facility-based platform in Burkina Faso. The PROMIS intervention entails a comprehensive preventive package offered on a monthly basis to caregivers of children, while children are screened for acute malnutrition (AM). The package consists of behavior change communication on essential nutrition and hygiene actions, and monthly preventive doses of small quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements (SQ-LNS) for children aged 6 to 23.9 months. Positive AM cases are referred to treatment services offered by first-line health services according to the CMAM model. The PROMIS intervention will be evaluated using a mixed methods approach. The impact study encompasses two types of study design: i) repeated cross-sectional surveys conducted at baseline and at endline after 24 months of program implementation and ii) a longitudinal study with a monthly follow-up for 18 months. Primary study impact measures include the incidence and endpoint prevalence of AM, AM screening coverage and treatment compliance. A process evaluation will assess the feasibility and quality of implementation of the intervention guided by country specific program impact pathways (PIPs). Cost-effectiveness analysis will assess the economic feasibility of the intervention. The PROMIS study assesses the effectiveness of an innovative model to integrate prevention and treatment interventions for greater and more sustainable impacts on the incidence and prevalence of AM using a rigorous, theory-based randomized control trial approach. This type of programmatic research is urgently needed to help program implementers, policy makers, and investors prioritize, select and scale-up the best program models to prevent and treat AM and achieve the World Health Assembly goal of reducing childhood wasting to less than 5% globally by the year 2025. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02323815 (registered on December 18, 2014) and NCT02245152 (registered on September 16, 2014).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Unknown 203 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 17%
Researcher 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 9%
Other 12 6%
Other 46 22%
Unknown 51 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 17%
Social Sciences 17 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 3%
Other 33 16%
Unknown 57 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,325,950
of 11,761,635 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#4,814
of 8,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,485
of 258,265 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#99
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,761,635 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,068 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 258,265 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.