Skip to main content
. 2022 Dec 8;19(2):e13460. doi: 10.1111/mcn.13460

Table 3.

Programme effect on men's nutrition knowledge score, using endline data only

Characteristics Control SMS IPC SMS + IPC
Maximum n 366 350 324 354
Breastfeeding score, mean (SD) 0.41 (0.20) 0.43 (0.22) 0.39 (0.21) 0.40 (0.21)
Unadjusted β 0.02 −0.02 −0.01
p Value 0.21 0.30 0.50
Adjusted β a 0.02 −0.01 −0.01
p Valueb 0.17 0.61 0.64
Child feeding and micronutrient score, mean (SD) 0.44 (0.22) 0.45 (0.21) 0.49 (0.24) 0.53 (0.22)
Unadjusted β 0.01 0.05 0.09
p Value 0.69 0.02 <0.001
Adjusted β 0.01 0.05 0.09
p Value 0.58 0.03 <0.001
Hygiene score, mean (SD) 0.52 (0.28) 0.57 (0.28) 0.58 (0.27) 0.59 (0.27)
Unadjusted β 0.05 0.07 0.07
p Value 0.03 0.001 <0.001
Adjusted β 0.05 0.07 0.07
p Value 0.02 0.001 <0.001
Total knowledge score, mean (SD) 0.48 (0.19) 0.50 (0.21) 0.51 (0.20) 0.54 (0.19)
Unadjusted β 0.03 0.04 0.06
p Value 0.05 0.04 <0.001
Adjusted β 0.03 0.04 0.07
p Value 0.02 0.04 <0.001

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; IPC, interpersonal communication; SMS, short message service.

a

Mixed‐effects models included a fixed part (intervention group, time of survey visit, interaction term between intervention group and time of survey visit) and a random part (village and individual clustering), adjusted by religion, type of drinking water sources, type of toilet facilities and garden ownership.

b

Treatment effect (95% CI) and p value of treatment effect derived using contrasts of average marginal effect.