Browsing by Author "Newman JE"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Theory-driven process evaluation of a complementary feeding trial in four countries.
(2014-Apr) Newman JE; Garces A; Mazariegos M; Michael Hambidge K; Manasyan A; Tshefu A; Lokangaka A; Sami N; Carlo WA; Bose CL; Pasha O; Goco N; Chomba E; Goldenberg RL; Wright LL; Koso-Thomas M; Krebs NF; Statistics and Epidemiology, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA, Multidisciplinary Health Institute, Francisco Marroquin University, Guatemala City 01011, Guatemala, Institute for Nutrition of Central America and Panama, Guatemala City 01011, Guatemala, Department of Pediatrics, Section of Nutrition, University of Colorado Denver, Aurora, CO 80045, USA, Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia, Lusaka 34681, Zambia, Kinshasa School of Public Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo, Department of Community Health Science and Family Medicine, Aga Khan University Medical College, Karachi 74800, Pakistan, Department of Pediatrics/Division of Neonatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA, Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA, University Teaching Hospital, Lusaka 34681, Zambia, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA and Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD 20852, USA.; CIDRZ; Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia (CIDRZ)
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.
Universal definition of loss to follow-up in HIV treatment programs: a statistical analysis of 111 facilities in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
(2011-Oct) Chi BH; Yiannoutsos CT; Westfall AO; Newman JE; Zhou J; Cesar C; Brinkhof MW; Mwango A; Balestre E; Carriquiry G; Sirisanthana T; Mukumbi H; Martin JN; Grimsrud A; Bacon M; Thiebaut R; University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America. bchi@cidrz.org; CIDRZ; Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia (CIDRZ)
BACKGROUND: Although patient attrition is recognized as a threat to the long-term success of antiretroviral therapy programs worldwide, there is no universal definition for classifying patients as lost to follow-up (LTFU). We analyzed data from health facilities across Africa, Asia, and Latin America to empirically determine a standard LTFU definition. METHODS AND FINDINGS: At a set "status classification" date, patients were categorized as either "active" or "LTFU" according to different intervals from time of last clinic encounter. For each threshold, we looked forward 365 d to assess the performance and accuracy of this initial classification. The best-performing definition for LTFU had the lowest proportion of patients misclassified as active or LTFU. Observational data from 111 health facilities-representing 180,718 patients from 19 countries-were included in this study. In the primary analysis, for which data from all facilities were pooled, an interval of 180 d (95% confidence interval [CI]: 173-181 d) since last patient encounter resulted in the fewest misclassifications (7.7%, 95% CI: 7.6%-7.8%). A secondary analysis that gave equal weight to cohorts and to regions generated a similar result (175 d); however, an alternate approach that used inverse weighting for cohorts based on variance and equal weighting for regions produced a slightly lower summary measure (150 d). When examined at the facility level, the best-performing definition varied from 58 to 383 d (mean=150 d), but when a standard definition of 180 d was applied to each facility, only slight increases in misclassification (mean=1.2%, 95% CI: 1.0%-1.5%) were observed. Using this definition, the proportion of patients classified as LTFU by facility ranged from 3.1% to 45.1% (mean=19.9%, 95% CI: 19.1%-21.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this evaluation, we recommend the adoption of ≥180 d since the last clinic visit as a standard LTFU definition. Such standardization is an important step to understanding the reasons that underlie patient attrition and establishing more reliable and comparable program evaluation worldwide. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.