Watt 2009.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | RCT | |
| Participants | Setting: inner London boroughs of Camden and Islington from December 2002 to February 2004 Inclusion criteria: women with non‐professional occupation who understands written and spoken English; resident in the area. Singleton babies born at > 37 weeks with birth weight above 2500 g Exclusion criteria: women younger than 17 years old; infants with diagnosis of a serious medical condition or on special diets or over 12 weeks of age at recruitment 157 women were enrolled in the nutrition education group and 155 in the control group |
|
| Interventions | Intervention group: monthly home visits by a group of trained local mothers starting when the baby was about 3 months old until the baby's first birthday to complement support and advice offered by health professionals Control group: standard professional support of health visitors and general practitioners |
|
| Outcomes |
Primary outcome Daily vitamin C intake from fruits as the primary outcome Other outcomes Feeding habit Dietary intake Maternal knowledge Weight and height of infants at 12 months and at 18 months |
|
| Identification | ||
| Notes | Data from the study were insufficient for inclusion in the meta‐analysis as the study reported exclusive breastfeeding for less than 4 months and growth parameters at 3, 12, and 18 months only. Hence, change in growth parameters between 6 and 12 months of age could not be calculated | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "A random allocation schedule was prepared in advance using random digit computer tables" |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Quote: "Following recruitment, women were allocated a sequential identification number and simple randomisation was used to allocate them to either intervention or control group. The study administrator was responsible for the randomisation process. As a result, those responsible for recruiting and assessing outcomes were all masked to group assignment" |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No information was provided; however, the intervention is not amenable to blinding of participants nor personnel delivering the intervention. Outcomes included in this review (growth parameters) are unlikely to be affected by lack of blinding |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | For the purpose of the growth parameters, the article does not mention who will carry out follow‐up at 12 and 18 months of age to obtain the growth parameters. However, calibrated and standardised equipment is used |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | 212 (68%) infants completed follow‐up at 18 months; a large number of mothers could not be contacted |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All proposed outcomes were reported |
| Other bias | Low risk | |
CG: control group.
CI: confidence interval.
GF: gain frame.
HAZ: height‐for‐age z score.
ICDS: Integrated Child Development Services.
LAZ: length‐for‐age z score.
LF: loss frame.
MUAC: mid‐upper arm circumference.
RCT: randomised controlled trial.
SD: standard deviation.
SMS: short messaging service.
TTM: TransTheoretical Model.
UNICEF: United Nations Children's Fund.
WAZ: weight‐for‐age z score.
WHO: World Health Organization.
WHZ: weight‐for‐height z score.
WIC: Women, Infants, and Children programme.
WLZ: weight‐for‐length z score.