The impact of conditional cash transfers on child health in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

2014 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ebenezer Owusu-Addo ◽  
Ruth Cross
2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (03) ◽  
pp. 569-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRANCESCA BASTAGLI ◽  
JESSICA HAGEN-ZANKER ◽  
LUKE HARMAN ◽  
VALENTINA BARCA ◽  
GEORGINA STURGE ◽  
...  

AbstractThis article presents the findings of a review of the impact of non-contributory cash transfers on individuals and households in low- and middle-income countries, covering the literature of 15 years, from 2000 to 2015. Based on evidence extracted from 165 studies, retrieved through a systematic search and screening process, this article discusses the impact of cash transfers on 35 indicators covering six outcome areas: monetary poverty; education; health and nutrition; savings, investment and production; work; and empowerment. For most of the studies, cash transfers contributed to progress in the selected indicators in the direction intended by policymakers. Despite variations in the size and strength of the underlying evidence base by outcome and indicator, this finding is consistent across all outcome areas. The article also investigates unintended effects of cash transfer receipt, such as potential reductions in adult work effort and increased fertility, finding limited evidence for such unintended effects. Finally, the article highlights gaps in the evidence base and areas which would benefit from additional future research.


Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Oh ◽  
Emily C. Keats ◽  
Zulfiqar A. Bhutta

Almost two billion people are deficient in key vitamins and minerals, mostly women and children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Deficiencies worsen during pregnancy due to increased energy and nutritional demands, causing adverse outcomes in mother and child, but could be mitigated by interventions like micronutrient supplementation. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review that aimed to compile evidence from both efficacy and effectiveness trials, evaluating different supplementation interventions on maternal, birth, child health, and developmental outcomes. We evaluated randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies published since 1995 in peer-reviewed and grey literature that assessed the effects of calcium, vitamin A, iron, vitamin D, and zinc supplementation compared to placebo/no treatment; iron-folic (IFA) supplementation compared to folic acid only; multiple micronutrient (MMN) supplementation compared to IFA; and lipid-based nutrient supplementation (LNS) compared to MMN supplementation. Seventy-two studies, which collectively involved 314 papers (451,723 women), were included. Meta-analyses showed improvement in several key birth outcomes, such as preterm birth, small-for-gestational age (SGA) and low birthweight with MMN supplementation, compared to IFA. MMN also improved child outcomes, including diarrhea incidence and retinol concentration, which are findings not previously reported. Across all comparisons, micronutrient supplementation had little to no effect on mortality (maternal, neonatal, perinatal, and infant) outcomes, which is consistent with other systematic reviews. IFA supplementation showed notable improvement in maternal anemia and the reduction in low birthweight, whereas LNS supplementation had no apparent effect on outcomes; further research that compares LNS and MMN supplementation could help understand differences with these commodities. For single micronutrient supplementation, improvements were noted in only a few outcomes, mainly pre-eclampsia/eclampsia (calcium), maternal anemia (iron), preterm births (vitamin D), and maternal serum zinc concentration (zinc). These findings highlight that micronutrient-specific supplementation should be tailored to specific groups or needs for maximum benefit. In addition, they further contribute to the ongoing discourse of choosing antenatal MMN over IFA as the standard of care in LMICs.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ndubuisi Onyemaechi ◽  
William N.A. Menson ◽  
Xan Goodman ◽  
Samantha Slinkard ◽  
Obinna E Onwujekwe ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: The review aimed at systematically examining the evidence in articles that assess the clinical effects and impact of traditional bonesetters on contemporary fracture care in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMICs).Methods: A systematic review was conducted. Articles were identified by database searching ((PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, SCOPUS, and Web of Science). Searching, selecting and reporting were conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement. The key words that were used in search for literature were: “Bonesetter”, “fracture healer” and “traditional bone setting”. Publications included for review were original articles, set in an LMIC and directly talked about the role and/or impact of traditional bonesetters in providing fracture care. Papers that focused on Low and Middle Income (LMIC) settings were reviewed.Results: A total of 176 papers were screened for eligibility and 15 studies were finally included. Nine were prospective studies, while 6 were retrospective studies. Most of the studies focused on clinical impacts of bone setter intervention. The evidence from the publications show that the main clinical effects of traditional bonesetters had been deleterious, but they had the potential to contribute positively when trained.Conclusion: Few well designed studies are available that assessed the impact of traditional bonesetters. Reported cases and reviews indicate their impact to be deleterious. However, the potential exist that when trained, these deleterious impact can be reduced through training for traditional bonesetters who contribute to fracture care in many LMICs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document