
An agriculture–nutrition intervention improved children's diet and growth in a randomized trial in G hana
Author(s) -
Marquis Grace S.,
Colecraft Esi K.,
Kanlisi Roland,
Aidam Bridget A.,
AtuobiYeboah Afua,
Pinto Comfort,
Aryeetey Richmond
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
maternal and child nutrition
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.181
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1740-8709
pISSN - 1740-8695
DOI - 10.1111/mcn.12677
Subject(s) - medicine , psychological intervention , randomized controlled trial , odds , cluster randomised controlled trial , demography , intervention (counseling) , nutrition education , odds ratio , weight for age , pediatrics , environmental health , population , gerontology , logistic regression , surgery , pathology , psychiatry , sociology
Stunting in Ghana is associated with rural communities, poverty, and low education; integrated agricultural interventions can address the problem. This cluster randomized controlled trial tested the effect of a 12‐month intervention (inputs and training for poultry farming and home gardening, and nutrition and health education) on child diet and nutritional status. Sixteen clusters were identified and randomly assigned to intervention or control; communities within clusters were randomly chosen, and all interested, eligible mother–child pairs were enrolled (intervention: 8 clusters, 19 communities, and 287 households; control: 8 clusters, 20 communities, and 213 households). Intention‐to‐treat analyses were used to estimate the effect of the intervention on endline minimum diet diversity (≥4 food groups), consumption of eggs, and length‐for‐age (LAZ)/height‐for‐age (HAZ), weight‐for‐age (WAZ), and weight‐for‐length (WLZ)/weight‐for‐height (WHZ) z ‐scores; standard errors were corrected for clustering. Children were 10.5 ± 5.2 months (range: 0–32) at baseline and 29.8 ± 5.4 months (range: 13–48) at endline. Compared with children in the control group, children in the intervention group met minimum diet diversity (adjusted odds ratio = 1.65, 95% CI [1.02, 2.69]) and a higher LAZ/HAZ ( β = 0.22, 95% CI [0.09, 0.34]) and WAZ ( β = 0.15, 95% CI [0.00, 0.30]). Sensitivity analyses with random‐effects and mixed‐effects models and as‐treated analysis were consistent with the findings. There was no group difference in WLZ/WHZ. Integrated interventions that increase access to high‐quality foods and nutrition education improve child nutrition.