Dataset Information

Cash transfer programmes in lower-income and middle-income countries: understanding pathways to nutritional change-a realist review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Child malnutrition continues to be a significant global public health concern. Nutrition-related interventions have changed and diversified over the last two decades, with increasing emphasis on nutrition-sensitive programmes that address underlying determinants of child malnutrition. Cash transfer programmes (CTPs) are used with increasing popularity in lower-income and middle-income countries to improve both food/nutrition insecurity and resilience. Available studies, however, provide mixed findings on the outcomes of CTPs for child nutritional status. This review is the first stage of a research project to develop evidence-informed theories of how CTPs affect child malnutrition. These will be empirically tested in the field and contribute to a better understanding of how, why, for whom and in what circumstances CTPs can be implemented to optimise impacts on child nutritional status.

Methods and analysis

This realist review is informed by available standards for realist reviews and follows a five-step process. In step 1, an initial scoping of literature identified potential contextual factors and underlying mechanisms that influence nutritional outcomes, and potential theories developed to address our research question. In step 2, a systematic literature search using multiple databases will be undertaken with papers screened using defined inclusion/exclusion criteria. In step 3, included studies will be appraised, data extracted into a bespoke data extraction tool and used to test and further refine our explanatory framework. The fourth step will synthesise, using a mix of inductive and deductive analytical processes to identify patterns, link chains of inference and tracking and linking of articles. The final step involves dissemination of a preliminary theory for feedback prior to empirically testing it in Kenya and Ethiopia where large-scale CTPs are being implemented.

Ethics and dissemination

This review will not involve primary data collection. Findings will be presented in accordance with Realist and Meta-Narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards guidelines and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Trial registration number

CRD42018110735.

SUBMITTER: Floate HJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6537996 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveAntenatal care (ANC) is crucial to protecting the health of pregnant women and their unborn children; however, the uptake of ANC among pregnant women in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) is suboptimal. One popular strategy to increase the uptake of health services, including ANC visits, are conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes. CCT programmes require beneficiaries to comply with certain conditionalities in order to receive a financial sum. A systematic review was carried out to determine whether CCT programmes have a positive impact on ANC uptake in LMIC populations.MethodsElectronic databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Maternity and Infant Care and Global Health were searched from database inception to 21 January 2022. Reference checking and grey literature searches were also applied. Eligible study designs were randomised controlled trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series analysis. Risk of bias assessments were undertaken for each study by applying the Risk of Bias 2 tool and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool.ResultsOut of 1534 screened articles, 18 publications were included for analysis. Eight studies reported statistically non-significant results on all reported outcomes. Seven studies demonstrated statistically significant positive effects ranging from 5.5% to 45% increase in ANC service uptake. A further three studies reported small but statistically significant impact of CCT on the use of ANC services in both positive (2.5% increase) and negative (3.7% decrease) directions. Subanalysis of results disaggregated by socioeconomic status (SES) indicated that ANC attendance may be more markedly improved by CCT programmes in low SES populations; however, results were inconclusive.ConclusionOur evidence synthesis presented here demonstrated a highly heterogeneous evidence base pertaining to the impact of CCTs on ANC attendance. More high-powered studies are required to elucidate the true impact of CCT programmes on ANC uptake, with particular focus on the barriers and enablers of such programmes in achieving intended outcomes.

Project description:As community engagement (CE) is implemented for sustainable maternal and newborn health (MNH) programming, it is important to determine how these approaches work. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have become a particular focus for MNH CE activities due to their high burden of maternal and neonatal deaths. MNH messaging and communication to engage communities are likely to differ by context, but how these approaches are actually developed and implemented within CE is not well understood. Understanding how communications in CE actually work is vital in the translation of learnings across programmes and to inform future projects. The purpose of this realist review is to describe how, why, to what extent and for whom communications in CE contribute to MNH programming in LMICs. After searching academic databases, grey literature and literature suggested by the expert advisory committee, documents were included if they described the CE communication processes/activities used for MNH programming in an LMIC. Relevant documents were assessed for richness (depth of insight) and rigor (trustworthiness and coherence of data/theories). Data were extracted as context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) and synthesized into demi-regularities to contribute to theory refinement. After screening 416 records, 45 CMOCs were extracted from 11 documents. This informed five programme theories explaining that communications in CE for an MNH programme work when: communities are actively involved throughout the programme, the messaging and programme are acceptable, communication sources are trusted, the community has a reciprocal relationship with the programme and the community sees value in the programme. While these findings reflect what is often anecdotally known in CE or acknowledged in communications theory, they have implications for policy, practice and research by highlighting the importance of centring the community's needs and priorities throughout the stages of developing and implementing communications for CE in MNH.

Project description:BackgroundTo strengthen the impact of cash transfers, these interventions have begun to be packaged as cash-plus programmes, combining cash with additional transfers, interventions, or services. The intervention's complementary ("plus") components aim to improve cash transfer effectiveness by targeting mediating outcomes or the availability of supplies or services. This study examined whether cash-plus interventions for infants and children <5 are more effective than cash alone in improving health and well-being.Methods and findingsForty-two databases, donor agencies, grey literature sources, and trial registries were systematically searched, yielding 5,097 unique articles (as of 06 April 2021). Randomised and quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion if the intervention package aimed to improve outcomes for children <5 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and combined a cash transfer with an intervention targeted to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 (No Hunger), SDG3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG4 (Education), or SDG16 (Violence Prevention), had at least one group receiving cash-only, examined outcomes related to child-focused SDGs, and was published in English. Risk of bias was appraised using Cochrane Risk of Bias and ROBINS-I Tools. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for a cash-plus intervention category when there were at least 3 trials with the same outcome. The review was preregistered with PROSPERO (CRD42018108017). Seventeen studies were included in the review and 11 meta-analysed. Most interventions operated during the first 1,000 days of the child's life and were conducted in communities facing high rates of poverty and often, food insecurity. Evidence was found for 10 LMICs, where most researchers used randomised, longitudinal study designs (n = 14). Five intervention categories were identified, combining cash with nutrition behaviour change communication (BCC, n = 7), food transfers (n = 3), primary healthcare (n = 2), psychosocial stimulation (n = 7), and child protection (n = 4) interventions. Comparing cash-plus to cash alone, meta-analysis results suggest Cash + Food Transfers are more effective in improving height-for-age (d = 0.08 SD (0.03, 0.14), p = 0.02) with significantly reduced odds of stunting (OR = 0.82 (0.74, 0.92), p = 0.01), but had no added impact in improving weight-for-height (d = -0.13 (-0.42, 0.16), p = 0.24) or weight-for-age z-scores (d = -0.06 (-0.28, 0.15), p = 0.43). There was no added impact above cash alone from Cash + Nutrition BCC on anthropometrics; Cash + Psychosocial Stimulation on cognitive development; or Cash + Child Protection on parental use of violent discipline or exclusive positive parenting. Narrative synthesis evidence suggests that compared to cash alone, Cash + Primary Healthcare may have greater impacts in reducing mortality and Cash + Food Transfers in preventing acute malnutrition in crisis contexts. The main limitations of this review are the few numbers of studies that compared cash-plus interventions against cash alone and the potentially high heterogeneity between study findings.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that few cash-plus combinations were more effective than cash transfers alone. Cash combined with food transfers and primary healthcare show the greatest signs of added effectiveness. More research is needed on when and how cash-plus combinations are more effective than cash alone, and work in this field must ensure that these interventions improve outcomes among the most vulnerable children.

Project description:Background: We examined recent trends in mobile money and branchless banking regulations related to cash-in, cash-out (CICO) networks (physical access points allowing users to exchange physical cash and electronic money) in low- and middle-income countries, and reviewed evidence on the impacts of CICO regulations on markets and financial inclusion. Methods: Regulation and literature searches began in August 2017 and concluded in June 2018. For the regulatory search we compiled an original database of regulations targeting CICO networks in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Tanzania, and Uganda. To review evidence of impacts of regulations we conducted additional global searches on Scopus, Google Scholar, and Google using keywords for specific regulatory approaches (e.g., regulation of CICO agents) or hypothesized impacts (e.g., financial inclusion). Results: The resulting database of CICO regulations in the eight focus countries includes 127 regulatory documents, which we coded for four groups of regulations, namely: Business Channel Requirements; Agent Requirements; Regulations on Caps, Fees and Charges; and Customer Identification Requirements. Early CICO regulations focused on agent selection rules, limits on fees, and know-your-customer requirements. More recent waves of regulation have expanded or restricted services CICO agents provide, and also imposed reporting requirements on service providers in an effort to prevent fraud or enhance financial inclusion. Our search for evidence of impacts of CICO regulations resulted in a sample of 90 documents published since 2005, of which only 31 provided evidence on CICO regulation impacts, with most limited in scope-suggesting rigorous policy analysis remains lacking in this quickly expanding sector. Conclusions: Many low- and middle-income countries have introduced regulations that may affect CICO networks, with regulatory approaches differing across geographies and over time. While anecdotal reports of regulatory impacts exist, we found limited evidence of impacts of regulations on CICO networks or on CICO-related financial inclusion.

Project description:IntroductionHealth systems responsiveness is a key objective of any health system, yet it is the least studied of all objectives particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. Research on health systems responsiveness highlights its multiple elements, for example, dignity and confidentiality. Little is known, however, about underlying theories of health systems responsiveness, and the mechanisms through which responsiveness works. This realist synthesis contributes to bridging these two knowledge gaps.Methods and analysisIn this realist synthesis, we will use a four-step process, comprising: mapping of theoretical bases, formulation of programme theories, theory refinement and testing of programme theories using literature and empirical data from Ghana and Vietnam. We will include theoretical and conceptual pieces, reviews, empirical studies and grey literature, alongside the primary data. We will explore responsiveness as entailing external and internal interactions within health systems. The search strategy will be purposive and iterative, with continuous screening and refinement of theories. Data extraction will be combined with quality appraisal, using appropriate tools. Each fragment of evidence will be appraised as it is being extracted, for its relevance to the emerging programme theories and methodological rigour. The extracted data pertaining to contexts, mechanisms and outcomes will be synthesised to identify patterns and contradictions. Results will be reported using narrative explanations, following established guidance on realist syntheses.Ethics and disseminationEthics approvals for the wider RESPONSE (Improving health systems responsiveness to neglected health needs of vulnerable groups in Ghana and Vietnam) study, of which this review is one part, were obtained from the ethics committees of the following institutions: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (ref: 22981), University of Leeds, School of Medicine (ref: MREC19-051), Ghana Health Service (ref: GHS-ERC 012/03/20) and Hanoi University of Public Health (ref: 020-149/DD-YTCC).We will disseminate results through academic papers, conference presentations and stakeholder workshops in Ghana and Vietnam.Prospero registration numberCRD42020200353. Full record: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020200353.

Project description:ImportanceMany randomized clinical trials (RCTs) led by high-income countries (HICs) now enroll patients from lower middle-income countries (LMICs) and upper middle-income countries (UMICs). Although enrolling diverse populations promotes research collaborations, there are issues regarding which countries participate in RCTs and how this participation may contribute to global research.ObjectiveTo describe which UMICs and LMICs participate in RCTs led by HICs.Design, setting, and participantsA cross-sectional study of all oncology RCTs published globally during January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2017, was conducted. The study cohort was restricted to RCTs led by HICs that enrolled participants from LMICs and UMICs. Study analyses were conducted in November 1, 2021, to May 31, 2022.Main outcomes and measuresA bibliometric approach (Web of Science 2007-2017) was used to explore whether RCT participation was proportional to other measures of cancer research activity. Participation in RCTs (ie, percentage of RCTs in the cohort in which each LMIC and UMIC participated) was compared with country-level cancer research bibliometric output (ie, percentage of total cancer research bibliometric output from the same group of countries that came from a specific LMIC and UMIC).ResultsAmong the 636 HIC-led RCTs, 186 trials (29%) enrolled patients in LMICs (n = 84 trials involving 11 LMICs) and/or UMICs (n = 181 trials involving 26 UMICs). The most common participating LMICs were India (42 [50%]), Ukraine (39 [46%]), Philippines (23 [27%]), and Egypt (12 [14%]). The most common participating UMICs were Russia (115 [64%]), Brazil (94 [52%]), Romania (62 [34%]), China (56 [31%]), Mexico (56 [31%]), and South Africa (54 [30%]). Several LMICs are overrepresented in the cohort of RCTs based on proportional cancer research bibliometric output: Ukraine (46% of RCTs but 2% of cancer research bibliometric output), Philippines (27% RCTs, 1% output), and Georgia (8% RCTs, 0.2% output). Overrepresented UMICs include Russia (64% RCTs, 2% output), Romania (34% RCTs, 2% output), Mexico (31% RCTs, 2% output), and South Africa (30% RCTs, 1% output).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, a substantial proportion of RCTs led by HICs enrolled patients in LMICs and UMICs. The LMICs and UMICs that participated in these trials did not match overall cancer bibliometric output as a surrogate for research ecosystem maturity. Reasons for this apparent discordance and how these data may inform future capacity-strengthening activities require further study.

Project description:IntroductionPeople are increasingly mobile for numerous reasons, including healthcare. Patient mobility has vast implications for individuals, communities and whole populations and yet, to date, research on patient mobility has been quite limited. Only a small body of evidence exists on patient mobility between low-income and middle-income countries, instead having focused primarily on cross-border movement between high-income and low-income countries. In this paper, we present a protocol for examining this under-studied phenomenon.Methods and analysisWe propose to examine patient mobility between low-income and middle-income countries using a realist synthesis approach. Specifically, we aim to document why patients from low-income and middle-income countries cross international borders for healthcare, by identifying the mechanisms through which patients decide to cross-borders, and the contextual characteristics of domestic health markets that influence this choice. An underlying theory was established, based on the lead author's experience and a brief literature review, which will provide the basis to analyse search results in a subsequent paper. Search results will be obtained from databases (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, EconLit, Web of Science) and the grey literature. An expert committee will be enlisted, prior to screening results, to review search results to ensure comprehensiveness. Based on this preliminary theory, we propose that, in some low-income and middle-income country markets, the interaction between demand-side and supply-side determinants results in market imperfections that, in turn, lead to patient movement across borders.Ethics and disseminationThe study does not involve primary research and, therefore, does not require formal ethical approval; we do, however, follow the relevant standards of utility, usefulness, feasibility, propriety, accuracy and accountability. The standards of realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis (RAMESES) will be adhered to in reporting the findings of the review. Once completed, the findings of the resulting manuscript will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberThis protocol has been registered with PROSPERO, registration number CRD42014014391.

Project description:Maternal mortality is disproportionately higher in low- and middle-income countries compared to other parts of the world. International research efforts are reflective of the urgency to improve global maternal outcomes. The existing literature of maternal health interventions in low- and middle-income countries targets a variety of populations and intervention types. However, there is a notable lack of systemic reviews that examine the wider contextual and mechanistic factors that have contributed to the outcomes produced by interventions. This article aims to use realist synthesis design to identify and examine the relationships between the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of maternal health interventions conducted in low- and middle-income countries. This will inform evidence-based practice for future maternal health interventions. In May 2022, we searched four electronic databases for systematic reviews of maternal health interventions in low- and middle-income countries published in the last 5 years. We used open and axial coding of contexts, mechanisms and outcomes to develop an explanatory framework for intervention effectiveness. After eligibility screening and full-text analysis, 44 papers were included. The majority of effective interventions reported good healthcare system contexts, especially the importance of infrastructural capacity to implement and sustain the intervention. Most intervention designs used increasing knowledge and awareness at an individual and healthcare-provider level to produce intended outcomes. The majority of outcomes reported related to uptake of healthcare services by women. All mechanism themes had a relationship with this outcome. Health system infrastructure must be considered in interventions to ensure effective implementation and sustainability. Healthcare-seeking behaviours are embedded within social and cultural norms, environmental conditions, family influences and provider attitudes. Therefore, effective engagement with communities and families is important to create new norms surrounding pregnancy and delivery. Future research should explore community mobilization and involvement to enable tailored interventions with optimal contextual fit.