Item

Heading Subheading Item

No.

1 Author

2 Citation
Data extraction
3 completion date
Extraction Details
4 Extraction code

Country of the
5 program

6 HDI of the country

GDP per capita of

7 the country

Country level Major

8 child nutrition
indices

Country level
information
Country level
9 Anemia data

Country level Major

10 Child Development
indices

Major
nutritive/stimulatio
11 n initiatives in the
country

12 Sector
13 Delivery platform

Intervention details
(Relevant pieces on
14 the intervention
 Intervention details
(Relevant pieces on
14 the intervention
from all sections of
the paper)
 Representativeness
15 in sample

Equity in reach of
16 intervention(s)

17 Aim of evaluation

18 Evaluation Funder

Evaluation
19 Conductor
Evaluation (Please
fill the adjoining
sheet for details on Implementation
the outcomes in the 20 evaluation
study)

21 Cost evaluation
Strengths of
22 evaluation
Limitations of
23 evaluation

Generalisability of
24 results
 25 Scale

26 Sustainability

Addition to
27 knowledge bank

NOT TO BE Conclusion
FILLED

Usefulness of the
28 intervention

Content
29 suggestions

Implementation
30 suggestion
Description

First author, along with contact details for the first author or the corresponding author as
mentioned in the paper
APA 6th Citation

Date when extraction is completed

Same as Excel File name: <coder letter><category of intervention><number>

Refer to Sheet 'File Saving Instructions'

Country where the program in the study was conducted

Please use the UNDP 2015 figures for HDI.

For Reference: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report.pdf
(Chapter 1, Table A1.1, Page 47)

Please use the World Bank 2016 figures for GDP per capita.
For Reference: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD

UNICEF Country statistics for nutrition based on the WHO Standards for stunting,
wasting,underweight,overweight, low birth weight. Use data from 2012 - Only country level data -
no state/district/city data. Include the year when the data is from
For reference: https://www.unicef.org/statistics/index_countrystats.html

WHO Anaemia in children under 5 years (% and year of survey) AND Anaemia in pregnant women
(% and year of survey) (Hb <110 g/L). Only country level data - no state/district/city data. Include
the year when the data is from.
For reference: http://apps.who.int/nutrition/landscape/report.aspx

UNICEF: MICS data if applicable. Include the Round and summary of child development indicators
from Key Findings - Use data from the latest round available for the entire country. If data for the
entire country is from cycle 3, and later rounds have data only from one state/part of the country,
please use data from cycle 3 as it contains data from the entire country
Only country level data - no state/district/city data
For Reference: http://mics.unicef.org/surveys - select country through the country filter.

Description of preexisting country-wide or local platform if any - fill in the notes section - E.g.:
alive and thrive, SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition), early learning program of WH

Sector of the intervention - finance, agriculture, social welfare, health etc.

Intervention levels - home based/community based/policy level intervention

° Curriculum details for this intervention (Such as Intervention/s content, curriculum, if the
curriculum is adapted, then the original curriculum, curriculum adaptation, etc.)

° Training for this intervention (Such as Number of days of training, topics of training, structure of
training, strategies of training, type of evaluation (Pre/post), trainer characteristics (Qualification,
experience , etc.))

° Supervision for this intervention (Such as Number of supervision sessions/supervisory contacts,

topics of supervision, documentation of supervision, etc.)

° Delivery agent details (Such as who is delivering, qualification of delivery agent (education,
experience), Incentive given to the agent for delivery of this intervention etc.)
° Behaviour change techniques used in the intervention (Such as provision of information
handouts or sheets; provision of materials such nutrition supplements or toys; problem solving
such as having conversations on how to make food tasty/nutritious; teaching by doing an activity
together such as making complementary foods with/in front of the mother; use of media such as
advertisements, radio shows, street plays etc; use of social support and assembling communities
together)

° Delivery strategy as intended and as actually implemented (Such as location, duration,

frequency of delivery contact, structure of delivery as group or one-on-one, if delivery strategy is
group, then ratio of group: delivery agent as intented and as actually implemented, etc.)

° If this intervention is integrated in an exisiting platform then provide description for: (Such as
Name of existing service/program, description of services delivered in the existing program,
implementer details, service delivery agent details (Education and experiencial qualification,
training received for the existing intervention/program, pay received in the existing platform),
Additional qualifications for this intervention, training for this intervention, supervision for this
intervention, additional work, aditional incentives, etc.)
° Information about intended beneficiaries (Such as age, intended indirect beneficiaries, intended
coverage number, intended coverage population description, intended control group,
service/intervention/standard of care received by control group. Also mention characterisitics of
the beneficiaries such as : rural/urban; low ses/high ses, specific disadvantage group targeted:
malnourished/children with disabilities/children with specific conditions, etc.)

Is the sample that received the intervention representative of the population? (as explicitly
mentioned in the paper: this randomly selected sample is representative of the population)

Is there equity in the reach of the intervention? ( did the intervention recruit everyone of the
targetted beneficiaries fairly?) as mentioned in the paper

What were the main aims of evalutions?

Who/Which organization funded the evaluation

Who/which organization conducted the evaluation

Describe as mentioned in the paper

° Whether and how fidelity, compliance, quality was assessed.
° The barriers and enablers for implementation
° Key learning for implementation
Cost effectiveness assessed or not, and the result of the same

Describe the strenths of the evaluation

Describe the limitations of the evaluation

Can the results be generalized?

Where can they be generalized? E.g. across the entire country/across entire population from
which sample is drawn from?
Describe as mentioned explicitly in the paper:
° At what level is this program being implemented - e.g. national level, state level, district level,
village level
° What kind of organization is implementing this program (Mention the name of the org as well) -
NGO/Government/Private organization/University/Coalitions and partnerships
° In which platform is this program nested under - Existing Governmental service delivery platform
like government preschool program/ Existing private platform like private school systems or
hospital systems etc. /Existing platform or a service in an NGO setup/a new platform or service by
government/a new platform or service by private sector/ a new platform or service by NGO

Have the authors expicitly discussed future plans for the program in terms of:
° Replication
° Expansion
° Sustainability
If they have, then please mention page number and paragraph location from the paper

How did this program add to what was already known? Describe both positive and negative
findings

How useful is the program, and in which areas?

Which design suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Which implementation suggestions will improve the program's utility?

Data type

Name

Citation

mm/dd/yyyy

Alphanumerical

Name

Number

Number

Number

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive
yes/no

yes/no

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive

Descriptive
Data Entry - Please fill in details for all arms of the intervention

Shahnaz Vazir, National Institute of Nutrition (ICMR), Jamai-Osmania P.O., Hyderabad 500 007, Andhra
Pradesh, India. Telephone 91- 40- 27197274, Fax 91-40-27019074, s_vazir@hotmail.com.
Vazir, 2013

09082017

GI1

India

0.6235587945

1709.387921198

Stunting (%) 2008-2012*,moderate & severe 48

Wasting (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 19.8
Underweight (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 42.5
Underweight (%) 2008-2012*, severe 15.8
Overweight (%) 2008-2012*, moderate & severe 1.9
Low birthweight (%) 2008-2012* 28

Anaemia in children under 5 years (59.0% and 2011)

Anaemia in pregnant women (54.0% and 2011) (Hb <110 g/L)

MICS-2000 --> which data?

1) Integrated Child Development Services Scheme (ICDS); 2) Mid-day meal Programs (MDM); 3) Special Nutrition Programs (SN
Based Nutrition Programs (WNP); 5) Applied Nutrition Programs (ANP); 6) Balwadi Nutrition Programs (BNP); 7) National Nutriti
Anaemia Prophylaxis Program (NNAPP); 8) National Program for Prevention of Blindness due to Vitamin A Deficiency; and 9) Na
Control Program (NGCP). (reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1291517)

Health
Home based

Intervention:
The Control Group (CG): received routine Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) (center-based supplemental food provi
year olds, pregnant and nursing mothers, home-visit-counseling on breastfeeding and complementary feeding, monthly growth
and non-formal preschool education for children 3 to 5 years of age);
The Complementary Feeding Group (CFG): received the ICDS plus the World Health Organization recommendations on breastfe
complementary foods;
The Responsive Complementary Feeding & Play Group (RCF&PG): received the same intervention as the CFG plus skills for resp
feeding and psychosocial stimulation.
Curriculums were adapted from:
CG: from ICDS program
CFG: from ICDS + Age appropriate intervention messages and materials used for complementary feeding followed the PAHO/W
Guidelines (PAHO/WHO 2003)
RCF&PG: age-appropriate messages and skills on how to understand and respond to infants’ cues of hunger/ appetite or satiati
the responsive feeding intervention (PAHO/WHO 2003, Engle et al. 2000), consistent with some of the responsive feeding mes
developed in Guideline #3 of the PAHO/WHO Guidelines (PAHO/WHO 2003) and messages on play and stimulation (Box 1).

Strategies of training: Village women received supervised training on how to counsel mothers/caregivers using the pictorial flip
intervention teams (60 VW) were trained to have focused ‘conversations’ with mothers for the various intervention topics.
Topics of training: Various intervention topics, the messages varied by child age. The key intervention messages given in Box 1
flip-charts.
Number of days, structure, type of evaluation, trainer characteristics : not found

Who: Trained graduates in nutrition supervised the VW

Topic of supervision: examined their records of visits and asked mothers independently what they were told in the VWs’ last v
held periodic reinforcement training sessions with VWs. The VWs visiting the CFG and the RCF&PG homes were trained separa
specific flipcharts.
Number of supervision session: not found.

Who is delivering: village women

Qualification: high-school-educated village women (VW) who were themselves mothers.
Incentive given: not found
Control group: ICDS service (center-based supplemental food provided to 1 to 6 year olds, pregnant and nursing mothers, hom
counseling on breastfeeding and complementary feeding, monthly growth monitoring, and non-formal preschool education fo
5 years of age).
Complementary feeding group (CFG): same with control group + received 11 nutrition education messages on sustained breas
complementary feeding through twice-a-month or four times a month (depending on the age of the infant) home visits over 12
the trained Village Women (VW) using flipcharts, other visual material, demonstrations and counseling sessions. Age appropria
intervention messages and materials used for complementary feeding followed the PAHO/WHO Guidelines.
Responsive Complementary Feeding and Play Group (RCF&PG): same with CFG + eight messages and skills on responsive feed
developmental stimulation messages using 5 simple toys. These age-appropriate messages and skills on how to understand an
infants’ cues of hunger/ appetite or satiation comprised the responsive feeding intervention. This group of mothers also receiv
developmentally-appropriate toys at five times during the intervention with instructions on how to use them to engage and pla
children.

Preparation: Six months prior to the selection of the sample for the main study, formative research was carried out in 4 village
same district to understand the knowledge and beliefs, motivations and aspirations of mothers/ families about infant foods an
number of meals, quantity offered, styles of feeding, child stimulation and local terms and their usage. The messages regarding
pre-tested for ease in understanding and communicating and for feasibility in adopting considering local availability and afford
Messages that addressed appropriate caregiver knowledge, beliefs, and care practices related to infant feeding and stimulation
selected. Both barriers and facilitating factors were identified before creating messages.
Location: rural Andhra Pradesh (Sixty villages were selected purposively from 3 Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) P
Duration: The intervention began when infants were 3 months of age because pregnant women in these communities give birt
natal villages and return home when their infants are about 3 months old. Mothers and infants (3 months of age) were followe
months.
Frequency: Frequency of home visits was the same for the two intervention groups. The first visits were in the 4thmonth, after
when infants were 3 months old. From 4–6 months, mothers were visited 2 times per month, or 6 visits; from 7 to 9 months, th
visited 4 times a month, or 12 visits; and from 10 to 14 months, they were visited 2 times a month, or 12 visits, for a total of 30
visits. The final assessment was at 15 months of infants’ age.
Structure of delivery: The VWs visiting the CFG and the RCF&PG homes were trained separately with specific flipcharts. When
were not present during the home visits, other family members were given the messages so that new practices could be imple
in the absence of the mother.

Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS): the only major national program in India that provides young children and moth
supplementary nutrition, health care and pre-school education. groups. These services consist mainly of center-based supplem
provided to 1 to 6 year olds, pregnant and nursing mothers, home-visit-counseling on breastfeeding and complementary feedin
growth monitoring, and non-formal preschool
education for children 3 to 5 years of age. No more details about IDS was found.
Mother on the third semester in pregnancy (intervention started when the baby on age 3 month)
intended coverage population: 60 villages with large population in rural state in India

It was not explicitly mentioned, but since they did random allocation for determining the intervention group, we can assumed
sample was representative.

Yes. There were no significant differences among the three groups in any of the baseline characteristics (Table 1). Those who co
intervention did not differ significantly from those lost to follow-up in these baseline measures (data not shown).

Can be generalized only in large village in India rural area (One of the selection criteria used to include villages into the study w
size and only larger villages were selected and randomized. Therefore, the results might not be applicable to smaller villages)
This program was implemented in Andar Pradesh, one of the 29 states in India (state level).
What kind of organization is implemting this program: INDO-US Collaborative study (NIH, NICHD, USA and the Indian Council
Research (ICMR), India

Replication: not found

Expansion: not found
Sustainability: not found

Positive findings:
Complementary feeding messages delivered through home visits were effective in changing knowledge and behaviors.
Importance of formative research to develop suitable intervention messages.
Negative findings:
The interventions in this trial have not solve the problem of micronutrient deficiency
Can not compare the two intervention equally since existence of tribal group was not matched, and the RCF&PG group was giv
materials and information.
Possibility of Hawthorne effect

The intervention is useful for changing knowledge and behavior about improved dietary intake, growth, and development in ru
India

quasi experimental in large population

equal amount of materials in the intervention groups

considering tribal groups in the population
implemented in rural and urban area
 Design Blinding

Outcome Evaluation a cluster randomized Random allocation was

intervention trial undertaken by a researcher who
was not familiar with the villages
or their characteristics
other than what could be derived
from the 2001 census data. The
assessment teams (psychologists
and nutritionists) were blinded to
the intervention and control
groups, and had no interaction
with the VWs. The villages had no
identification mark to indicate the
group to which they had been
randomized.

Outcome (mention if Tool/test used to assess Is the test an adaptation of

primary/secondary) outcome another tool/test
Dietary intake A standardized Yes
semiquantitative
Food Frequency
Questionnaire ( to assess
the frequency of
micronutrient-rich
vegetable and animal
foods onsumed by
infants during the
previous week)
24-hour recall method
(to assess dietary intake)
Nutritive Value of Indian
Foods (was used for
assessing nutrient
intakes of each infant)
Recommended Dietary
Intakes (RDI) for energy
and
nutrients from
complementary foods

Maternal Knowledge pretested questionnaires not found

and Beliefs about
complementary and
responsive feeding
Growth using standard Yes
Seca electronic weighing
scales precise to 10g and
calibrated weekly and an
Infantometer, a portable
rigid length board with a
head and a sliding foot
piece with
precision of 0.1 cm, was
used to measure supine
length of infants every
month.

Hemoglobin cyanmethemoglobin Yes

method

Morbidity through a recall of the No

prevalent illness
symptoms (fever, diarrhea,
dysentery, acute respiratory
infection, etc) suffered by
the infant in the previous
week. The data was scored
on the basis of the
presence or
the absence of morbidity
as 1 or 0. Each of the 5
symptoms mentioned
above
received a score of 1 if
present and scored 1, 2, 3,
4 or 5 as appropriate.
Child Development Bayley Scales of Infant Yes
Development-II (BSID-II)
Sampling Strategy Inclusion/Exclusion
Criteria

Sixty villages were selected purposively from 3 inclusion: recruitment

Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Project of 600 pregnant
Areas – the largest multi-services government women in their 3rd
program for maternal and child nutrition, health and trimester of
development in India. Sets of 3 villages that matched pregnancy, over a
on population size, maternal literacy and birthrate
using the then latest Census figures (2001) were period of 6 months.
grouped together to form strata to allow a stratified Research was held in
random allocation of village clusters across the 3 arms mothers/caregivers of
of the study until there were 20 villages per group. infants and toddlers 3–
This resulted in a total of 60 villages that provided the 15 months of age.
required sample of 600 pregnant women in their 3rd Exclusion:
trimester of pregnancy, over a period of 6 months. microcephaly, physical
These sets of matched village strata did not share handicapped, mother
geographical boundaries to prevent the mentally handicapped,
contamination of intervention messages between the cerebral palsy,
3 groups. The random allocation using a random thalasemia
number generator (facilitatedthrough a tailor-made
syntax program in SPSS which uses the select cases
function)

Which tool or test is it adapted from What is the reliability

of the tool used in the
paper
not found not found

The questions were constructed based on the not found

formative research data and the intervention
messages.
not found not found

International Committee for Standardization in not found

Hematology 1967

not found not found

not found not found
Sample Number recruited at base Sample attrition (%) Reason for attrition, as
mentioned in the paper

CG: 199 15% To allow a 20% attrition

CFG: 207 rate, the required sample
RCF&PG: 194 size was 200 per group
across 20 clusters. As the
clusters were villages, it
was not anticipated that
any whole village would
drop out of the study and
no allowance was made for
such attrition (and this
assumption held during
the study).

\
What is the frequency of What is the location of Who conducts the
measurement measurement measurement
At 6, 9, 12 and 15 months of infants’ not found not found
age. Frequency of micronutrient-rich
vegetable and animal foods consumed
by infants during the previous week.

at 6, 9, 12 and 15 months of infants’ not found not found

age. Because infants at 6 months
received very little food in addition to
breast milk and the 12 month data
were
similar to those at 15 months, only
the data at 9 and 15 months are
compared and shown for clarity
Infants and toddlers were weighed not found not found
every month . All measurement
techniques including maternal height
and weight at baseline followed
standard approved procedures

at 3 and 15 months of age for not found not found

infants and mothers

monthly not found not found

toddlers at age 15 months plus or minus not found not found
a window period of 15 days.
Result in brief (Raw and adjusted) (e.g. Without adjusting, the raw OR was x, after adjusting the OR was
y)
99% to 95% of infants at 9 and 15 months respectively were being breast fed in all three groups.

Significantly lower proportions of CG children were being fed all foods examined except for buffalo milk,
which was consumed by almost 100% of children across all groups and daily.

The median nutrient intakes were significantly higher among children in the CFG and RCF&PG
compared to the CG for energy, protein vitamin A, iron (15 months only) and zinc.

Even though the CFG and RCF&PG had significantly higher levels of micronutrient intake compared with
the CG, these were well below the RDIs for all the micronutrients except calcium at 9 months.

adjusted: the CFG and RCF&PG continued to have significantly higher mean intakes of energy (β=105,
SE= 30.2, β=107, SE=29.1 respectively), protein (β =2.6, SE=0.79; β =2.1, SE=0.82 respectively), iron (β
=0.3, SE=0.15, β =0.4, SE=0.15 respectively), vitamin A intakes (log transformed) (β =0.19, SE=0.060, β=
0.13, SE=0.063 respectively) and zinc (β =0.20, SE=0.07; β=0.30, SE=0.07 respectively) compared to the
control group at 15 months. However, in these adjusted analyses, the CFG but not RCF/PG was
significantly different in calcium intake (log transformed) (β =0.14, SE=0.053) when compared to the CG
at 15 months. Energy intake among the CFG and RCF&PG was similar to the RDI. Children’s protein
intake in the intervention groups and the CG all exceeded the RDI.

(adjusted for cluster randomization using mixed models)

educational messages to the intervention groups were significantly associated with changed maternal
knowledge/beliefs about foods that are good for infants at 9 and 15 months.

maternal responsive feeding knowledge and beliefs indicate a high percentage (90–100%) of positive
responses of mothers/ caregivers across all the groups on
5 of the 8 questions.
The baseline mean Z scores for length (CG: −0.72, CI: −0.97 to −0.46, CFG: −0.61, CI: −0.85 to −0.36,
RCF&PG: −0.59, CI: −0.85 to −0.33) and weight (CG: −0.82, CI: −1.04 to −0.59, CFG: −0.62, CI: −0.83 to
−0.40, RCF&PG: −0.79, CI: −1.02 to −0.56) were similar across the three groups. There were no
statistically significant mean differences for weight and length among the three groups at 3, 6, 9, 12 and
15 months of infant ages. After adjusting for potentially confounding factors, including morbidity there
were no significant differences among the three groups in mean length and weight at 15 months of age.

adjusted: intervention group was associated with significant differences in the change in length-for-age
z-scores between 3 and 15 months of age (β=0.19, SE=0.09) for CFG children compared to the CG), but
there was no significant difference between RCF&PG (β= 0.10, SE=0.10) and the CG).

The mean and SE of hemoglobin of the two intervention groups (CFG = 9.3 ± 0.06; RCF&PG = 9.3 ± 0.07)
was significantly (p<0.05) greater compared to the CG (9.0 ± 0.07) at 15 months. The two intervention
groups (CFG and RCF/PG) were not significantly different from each other

there were significant group differences at 15 months in mean number of morbidities, with the CG having a
higher mean morbidity score (1.76 ± 0.10 SE) compared to the CFG (0.90 ± 0.08 SE) and the RCF&PG (0.99 ± 0.09
SE) (p < 0.001), who did not differ from each other.
CFG children had greater mean scores (β =1.6, SE=1.07) than CG children but this difference was not statistically
significant. Multiple regression analyses showed that Mental Index scores were significantly higher (β =3.1,
SE=1.12) among RCF&PG children compared to the CG. There
were no significant differences in the Motor Development Index among the three groups in
either unadjusted or adjusted analyses
P value Effect size (if mentioned Effect Size (if not Adjusted variables (e.g.
explicitly in the mentioned in the paper age, sex, maternal
paper/tables) and calculated by the education etc.)
coder)
 OR: exp(beta) mixed model controlling
for maternal height, birth
weight, scheduled
significant at caste/tribe, standard of
p<0.05 living index, maternal
education and baseline
depression score

significant at
p<0.05
 baseline length-for-age z-
score, maternal height,
birth weight, morbidity,
significant at scheduled caste/tribe,
p<0.05 maternal education,
maternal depression score
at 3 months, and the
standard of living index

significant at
p<0.05

significant at
p<0.05
OR: exp(beta) standard of living index, birth
weight, maternal height,
maternal depression score at
3 months, maternal
education, scheduled caste/
tribe