Table 6. Effect of the intervention on child morbidity1.
| Child morbidity outcomes | Control | Intervention | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reported illness in the 2 weeks before the visit | |||
| Number of observed children × year2 | 156 | 160 | - |
| Number of children3 | 1073 | 1164 | |
| Cumulative episodes of illness (n) | 632 | 730 | - |
| Number of episodes per child × year (95% CI)4 | 4.1 (3.8, 4.4) | 4.6 (4.2, 4.9) | - |
| Incidence rate ratio (95% CI)5 | reference | 1.1 (1.0, 1.3) | 0.024 |
| Reported diarrhea in the 2 weeks before the visit | |||
| Number of observed children × year2 | 155 | 160 | |
| Number of children3 | 1068 | 1160 | |
| Cumulative episodes of diarrhea (n) | 202 | 237 | - |
| Number of episodes per child × year (95% CI)4 | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 1.5 (1.3, 1.7) | - |
| Incidence rate ratio (95% CI)5 | reference | 1.1 (0.9, 1.4) | 0.16 |
| Reported fever in the 2 weeks before the visit | |||
| Number of observed children × year2 | 155 | 160 | |
| Number of children3 | 1068 | 1164 | |
| Cumulative episodes of fever, (n) | 542 | 600 | - |
| Number of episodes per child × year (95% CI)4 | 3.5 (3.2, 3.8) | 3.7 (3.5, 4.0) | |
| Incidence rate ratio (95% CI)5 | reference | 1.1 (0.9, 1.2) | 0.15 |
| Reported acute respiratory infection in the 2 weeks before the visit | |||
| Number of observed children × year2 | 156 | 160 | |
| Number of children3 | 1076 | 1165 | |
| Cumulative episodes of acute respiratory infection (n) | 55 | 52 | |
| Number of episodes per child × year (95% CI)4 | 0.3 (0.3, 0.5) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | |
| Incidence rate ratio (95% CI)5 | reference | 0.9 (0.6, 1.3) | 0.61 |
| Knowledge score for recognizing dangerous child health signs, mean difference, (95% CI)6 | reference | 3.3 (0.4, 6.4) | 0.03 |
1 CI, confidence interval; Child morbidity results based on caregivers’ recall.
2 Calculated by the number of children followed-up × number of visits x observation duration of 2 weeks per visit, converted into years.
3 Number of children with at least one data point included in the analysis.
4 Confidence intervals are estimated from a Poisson regression model adjusted for clustering by health center catchment area.
5 Computed using a generalized linear latent and mixed model, with cluster pair and child as random effects, adjusted for child’s age and sex, and household socioeconomic score.
6 Computed using a mixed-effects linear regression model, with cluster pair and child as random effects, adjusted for women’s age, parity, education level, and household socioeconomic score.