Browsing by Author "Hambidge, Michael K."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

The Global Network Neonatal Cause of Death algorithm for low-resource settings.
(2017-Jun) Garces, Ana L.; McClure, Elizabeth M.; Pérez, Wilton; Hambidge, Michael K.; Krebs, Nancy F.; Figueroa, Lester; Bose, Carl L.; Carlo, Waldemar A.; Tenge, Constance; Esamai, Fabian; Goudar, Shivaprasad S.; Saleem, Sarah; Patel, Archana B.; Chiwila, Melody; Chomba, Elwyn; Tshefu, Antoinette; Derman, Richard J.; Hibberd, Patricia L.; Bucher, Sherri; Liechty, Edward A.; Bauserman, Melissa; Moore, Janet L.; Koso-Thomas, Marion; Miodovnik, Menachem; Goldenberg, Robert L.
AIM: This study estimated the causes of neonatal death using an algorithm for low-resource areas, where 98% of the world's neonatal deaths occur. METHODS: We enrolled women in India, Pakistan, Guatemala, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya and Zambia from 2014 to 2016 and tracked their delivery and newborn outcomes for up to 28 days. Antenatal care and delivery symptoms were collected using a structured questionnaire, clinical observation and/or a physical examination. The Global Network Cause of Death algorithm was used to assign the cause of neonatal death, analysed by country and day of death. RESULTS: One-third (33.1%) of the 3068 neonatal deaths were due to suspected infection, 30.8% to prematurity, 21.2% to asphyxia, 9.5% to congenital anomalies and 5.4% did not have a cause of death assigned. Prematurity and asphyxia-related deaths were more common on the first day of life (46.7% and 52.9%, respectively), while most deaths due to infection occurred after the first day of life (86.9%). The distribution of causes was similar to global data reported by other major studies. CONCLUSION: The Global Network algorithm provided a reliable cause of neonatal death in low-resource settings and can be used to inform public health strategies to reduce mortality.
Theory-driven process evaluation of a complementary feeding trial in four countries.
(2014-Apr) Newman, Jamie E.; Garces, Ana; Mazariegos, Manolo; Hambidge, Michael K.; 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.
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.