1. Outcomes for studies not assigned to any group or category.
| Study, and outcomes measured | Intervention data (number of participants) | Control data | Measure of effect (95% CI) | P value | Authors’ conclusion |
| Curnow 2002 | No intervention | Intervention group – clinical + Fibre Optic Transillumination (FOTI) | P value | Authors’ conclusions | |
| 24‐month DFS caries increments of first permanent molars: Clinical D1FS | 1.104 | 0.669 | 0.006 | Children in the intervention group had significantly less caries on their newly erupted permanent teeth when compared to the control group | |
| 24‐month DFS caries increments of first permanent molars: Clinical D3FS | 0.455 | 0.192 | 0.008 | ||
| 24‐month DFS caries increments of first permanent molars: Clinical + FOTI D1FS | 1.194 | 0.808 | 0.023 | ||
| 24‐month DFS caries increments of first permanent molars: Clinical + FOTI D3FS | 0.477 | 0.205 | 0.007 | ||
| Caries increment score 12 months after eruption of 1st permanent molars: clinical D1FS | 0.736 | 0.466 | 0.0316 | ||
| Caries increment score 12 months after eruption of 1st permanent molars: clinical D3FS | 0.264 | 0.105 | 0.0404 | ||
| Caries increment score 12 months after eruption of 1st permanent molars: clinical + FOTI D1FS | 0.788 | 0.524 | 0.0474 | ||
| Caries increment score 12 months after eruption of 1st permanent molars: clinical + FOTI D3FS | 0.28 | 0.111 | 0.0348 | ||
| Ernst 1999 | Hospital recruited clients (intervention) (N=28) | Hospital recruited controls (N=25) | Measure of effect (95% CI) | P value | Authors’ conclusion |
| Endpoint domain scores on 5 point Likert scale at 3 years : (1) Utilization of alcohol/drug treatment (Mean, SD) |
1 (4.9) | ‐0.6 (5.9) | Assessment of hospital recruited clients and controls after 3 years shows that clients scored significantly higher on the summary endpoint score of overall improvement in multiple domains. | ||
| (2) Abstinence from drug and alcohol (Mean, SD) | 3.9 (3.20) | 2.6 (4.2) | |||
| (3) Use of Family Planning (Mean, SD) | 2.3 (4.8) | 2.1 (4.70) | |||
| (4) Health and wellbeing of target child (Mean, SD) | 6.1 (2.3) | 4.1 (2.8) | |||
| (5) Appropriate connection with community services (Mean, SD) | 3.8 (4.7) | 1.9 (4.2) | |||
| (6) Multiple domains of the subjects' lives (Mean, SD) | 17.10 | 10.10 | t test ‐2.11 | 0,04 | |
| Flores 2005 | Case management (intervention) (N=139) | Control (N=136) | Measure of effect (95% CI) | P value | Authors’ conclusion |
| Proportion of children that obtained Health Insurance Coverage (primary outcome) | 96 | 57 | Adj. OR 7.78 [5.2 ‐11.64] | <0.0001 | Community based case managers were more effective in obtaining coverage for uninsured children than traditional Medicaid and SCHIP outreach and enrolment |
| Proportion continously insured (%) | 78 | 30 | <0.0001 | ||
| Proportion continously uninsured (%) | 4 | 43 | <0.0001 | ||
| Mean time (no.of days) to obtain insurance (SD) | 87.5 (68) | 134.8 (102.4) | <0.009 | ||
| Parents very satisfied with process of obtaining insurance (%) | 80 | 29 | <0.0001 | ||
| Mean parental satisfaction score for obtaining insurance (Likert scale 1‐5, SD) | 1.33 (0.77) | 2.4 (1.4) | <0.0001 | ||
| Gadomski 2006 | Intervention (N=416 farms) | Control (N=429 farms) | P value | Authors’ conclusions | |
| Mean Cumulative Injury density per 100 full time equivalents among children of all ages | 0.45 | 0.55 | 0.85 | Active dissemination of NAGCAT guidelines halved the incidence of NAGCAT preventable injuries among 7‐19 year olds on intervention farms in comparison to control farms. In 0 ‐ 19 years group, there was a sig increase in time span to occurence of a NAGCAT preventable injury in intervention compared to control group. | |
| Mean Cumulative incidence densities for strictly work related injuries all age groups | 0.34 | 0.44 | 0.31 | ||
| Injury incidence density/100 FTEs for children less than 7 years | 1.27 | 1.36 | 0.77 | ||
| Injury incidence density/100 FTEs for children 7 ‐ 16 years | 0.5 | 0.63 | 0.96 | ||
| North American Guidelines for Childrens Agricultural Tasks (NAGCAT) ‐ preventable injury incidence densities among 7 ‐19 year olds | 0.07 | 0.13 | 0.68 | ||
| All NAGCAT – related injury incidence densities among 7 – 19 year olds | 0.18 | 0.27 | 0.5 | ||
| Proportion reporting setting limits on amount of time child could perform work between breaks (%) | 25 | 16 | <0.01 | ||
| Proportion providing supervision to children while they were performing work (%) | 42 | 36 | 0.06 | ||
| Proportion preventing child from doing a particular job (%) | 61 | 61 | |||
| Proportion adding roll‐over protection structure during study period (%) | 3.5 | 2,9 | 0.89 | ||
| Proportion adding or repairing a power take off | 25 | 24 | 0.76 | ||
| Mean number of safety related changes made | 1.57 | 1.39 | 0.03 | ||
| Gielen 2002 | Enhanced intervention group | Standard intervention group | P value | Authors’ conclusions | |
| Proportion with hot water temperature ≤ 48.9 oC (N=115) | 47 | 47 | NS | There were no significant differences between the standard and enhanced intervention groups in the rates at which any of the safety practices were observed at home observation. | |
| Proportion with working smoke alarms (N=114) | 81 | 84 | NS | ||
| Proportion stairs protected by gate or door (N=96) | 27 | 23 | NS | ||
| Proportion poisons kept latched or locked up (N=121) | 10 | 12 | NS | ||
| Proportion homes with ipecac syrup (N=89) | 31 | 27 | NS | ||
| Parker 2008 | Intervention (N=23) | Control (N=30) | Intervention change (95% CI) | P value | Authors’ conclusion |
| Post‐intervention FEV1 intraday variability (Mean %, SD) | 14.4 (12.1) | 17.1 (13.7) | ‐1.3 [‐5.8, 3.0] | 0.559 | There was a significant beneficial effect on lung function in daily nadir FEV1 and daily nadir PF and reduced unscheduled health care utilization for asthma in the last 3 and 12 months. |
| Post‐intervention peak flow variability (Mean %, SD) | 8.7 (8.50) | 11.6 (9.7) | ‐2.1 [‐5.0, 0.8] | 0.153 | |
| Post‐intervention daily nadir FEV1 (% predicted, SD) | 83.1 (15.7) | 75.6 (18.5) | 10.0 [0.9, 19.1] | 0.032 | |
| Post‐intervention daily nadir peak flow (% predicted, SD) | 94.1(15) | 85.1(19,2) | 8.2 [1.1, 15.2] | 0.023 | |
| Proportion needed unscheduled medical care in last 12 months at post‐intervention | 59 (N=115) | 73 (n=112) | 0.40 [0.22, 0.74] | 0.004 | |
| Proportion needing unscheduled medical care in last 3 months at post‐intervention | 45 | 56 | 0.43 [0.23, 0.80] | 0.007 | |
| Proportion with any symptom more than 2 days per week, not on controller (corticosteriod) medication at post‐intervention | 42 | 46 | 0.56 [0.29, 1.06] | 0.073 | |
| Proportion with any symptom more than 2 days per week, not on any controller medication, at post‐intervention | 32 | 37 | 0.39 [0.20, 0.73] | 0.004 | |
| Swart 2008 | Intervention data (N=189) | Control data (N=188) | Mean difference (95% CI) | P value | Authors’ conclusion |
| Mean Total Injury Risk score (90) | 13.9 (0.53) | 14.2 (5.4) | ‐0.31 [‐1.8, 1.2] | 0.680 | Home visiting can effectively reduce home‐based child injury risks for burns related to unsafe practices. A non‐significant decline was noted for injuries related to electrical burns, paraffin burns and poison ingestion. |
| Mean risk score for burns, electrical (Total Risk score =20) | 1.1 (0.14) | 1.3 (0.14) | ‐0.19 [‐0.54, 0.16] | 0.294 | |
| Mean risk score for burns, paraffin (Total Risk score =20) | 3.2 (0.21) | 3.2 (0.21) | ‐0.03 [‐0.64, ‐0,57] | 0.911 | |
| Mean risk score for Burns, safety practices (Total Risk score =13) | 2.5 (0.12) | 2.9 (0.12) | ‐0.41 [‐0.76, ‐0.07] | 0.021 | |
| Mean risk score for Poison (Total Risk score =19) | 1.9 (0.20) | 2.4 (0.20) | ‐0.45 [‐1.01, 0.11] | 0.110 | |
| Mean risk score for Falls (Total Risk score =15) | 3.7 (0.24) | 3.6 (0.24) | 0.09 [‐0.60, 0.78] | 0.785 | |
| Zaman 2008 | LHW (N=52) | Usual care (N=53) | Measure of effect (95% CI) | P value | Authors’ conclusion |
| Communication skills: greets cordially (%) | 88.46 | 83.02 | OR 1.56 [0.29 – 8.32] | 0.597 | Nutrition counselling intervention resulted in (1) some improvements in LHW communication skills (2) more appropriate actions during consultations (3) improvements in child weight‐for‐age and weight‐for‐height at 180 days after the intervention, compared to usual care. |
| Communication skills: passes friendly remarks | 82.69 | 50.94 | OR 4.6 [1.32, 15.92] | 0.0160 | |
| Communication skills: pays attention to mothers | 90.38 | 84.91 | OR 1.67 [0.38, 7.34] | 0.498 | |
| Communication skills: encourages mothers to talk | 63.46 | 52.83 | OR 1.55 [0.48, 4.99] | 0.462 | |
| Communication skills: positive non‐verbal communication and body language | 94.23 | 90.57 | OR 1.7 [0.28, 10.51] | 0.563 | |
| Communication skills: asks about feeding and pays attention to reply | 50 | 24.53 | OR 3.07 [0.93] | 0.064 | |
| Communication skills: praises the mother about positive action | 36.54 | 7,55 | OR 7.5 [1.68, 29.5] | 0.008 | |
| Communication skills: recommends changes in inappropriate feeding practices | 32.69 | 3,77 | OR 12.38 [2.43, 63.25] | 0.003 | |
| Communication skills: explains why changes have to be done | 28.85 | 3,77 | OR 10.34 [2.05, 52.18] | 0.005 | |
| About feeding: asks if the child is breastfed | 50.03 | 27.27 | OR 3.15 [0.95, 10.43] | 0.060 | |
| About feeding: asks about other foods and drinks | 46.15 | 11,76 | OR 6.42 [1.37, 30.1] | 0.018 | |
| About feeding: asks size of portion | 27.45 | 5,66 | OR 6.18 [1.04, 36.6] | 0.045 | |
| About feeding: asks if changed feeding during illness | 15.56 | 9,09 | OR 2 [0.46, 8.73] | 0.353 | |
| Actions: weighs child | 57.69 | 47,17 | OR 1.52 [0.50 4,64] | 0.456 | |
| Actions: plots weight in growth chart | 36.54 | 7,95 | OR 7.05 [0.50, 4.64] | 0.034 | |
| Actions: checks current feeding against age recommended feeding | 38.46 | 5,66 | OR 10.4 [1.91, 56.8] | 0.007 | |
| Actions: checks if the mother has understood | 29.41 | 1,89 | OR 21.66 [2.6, 181.93] | 0.0046 | |
| Feeding practices: offered eggs 8 days ‐ 2 weeks | 47.68 (N=151) | 31. 95 (N=169) | OR 1.94 [1.04, 3.62] | 0.037 | |
| Feeding practices: offered chicken/beef/mutton 8 days ‐ 2 weeks | 49.67 | 31.95 | OR 2.1 [1.15, 3.83] | 0.016 | |
| Feeding practices: offered liver 8 days ‐ 2 weeks | 17.22 | 9.47 | OR 1.99 [0.89, 4.44] | 0.093 | |
| Feeding practices: added ghee/butter/oil 8 days ‐ 2 weeks | 30.46 | 24.85 | OR 1.32 [0.51, 3.42] | 0.562 | |
| Feeding practices: offered thick kitchuri 8 days ‐ 2 weeks | 61.59 | 44.97 | OR 1.96 [0.95, 4.05] | 0.068 | |
| Feeding practices: offered eggs at 180 days | 47.62 (N=126) | 26.72 (N=131) | OR 2.49 [1.03, 6.03] | 0.043 | |
| Feeding practices: offered chicken / beef / mutton at 180 days | 60.32 | 39.69 | OR 2.3 [0.996, 5.34] | 0.051 | |
| Feeding practices: offered liver at 180 days | 30.95 | 19.85 | OR 1.81 [0.79, 4.10] | 0.159 | |
| Feeding practices: added ghee/butter/oil at 180 days | 53.97 | 38.17 | OR 1.89 [0.75, 4.78] | 0.174 | |
| Feeding practices: offered thick kitchuri at 180 days | 65.87 | 44.27 | OR 2,43 [1.02, 5.76] | 0.044 | |
| Weight for age Z score ‐ 1st visit ‐ 2 weeks (Mean, SD) | ‐1.089 (1.23) | ‐1.439 (1.22) | 0.125 | ||
| Weight for age Z score ‐2nd visit ‐ 45 days (Mean, SD) | ‐1.319 (1.29) | ‐1.334 (1.19) | 0.950 | ||
| Weight for age Z score ‐ 3rd visit ‐ 180 days (Mean, SD) | ‐1.174(1.94) | ‐1.72 (1.27) | 0.012 | ||
| Height for age Z score ‐ 1st visit ‐ 2 weeks (Mean, SD) | ‐1.115 (1.36) | ‐1.407 (1.22) | 0.167 | ||
| Height for age Z score ‐2nd visit ‐ 45 days (Mean, SD) | ‐1.36 (1.29) | ‐1.575 (1.44) | 0.241 | ||
| Height for age Z score ‐ 3rd visit ‐ 180 days (Mean, SD) | ‐1.582 (1.58) | ‐1.705 (1.24) | 0.559 | ||
| Weight for height Z score ‐ 1st visit ‐ 2 weeks (Mean, SD) | ‐0.45 (1.01) | ‐0.559 (1.08) | 0.452 | ||
| Weight for height Z score ‐2nd visit ‐ 45 days (Mean, SD) | ‐0.536 (1.22) | ‐0.382 (1.08) | 0.447 | ||
| Weight for height Z score ‐ 3rd visit ‐ 180 days (Mean, SD) | ‐0.286 (1.22) | ‐0.794 (1.15) | 0.005 |