Compelling, credible, recent, direct impact data
Time to read
less than
1 minute
Read so far

Counselling - Breastfeeding Doubled

0 comments
Strategy researched
 
Exclusive breastfeeding counselling by peer counsellors
 
Impact achieved
 
 
Countries of study
 
Burkina Faso, Uganda, and South Africa
 
Research methodology
 
Cluster RCT with 2,579 mother-infant pairs
 
Journal
 
 
Journal paper title and link
 
 
Excerpt from Abstract
 
"The EBF prevalences based on 24-h recall at 12 weeks in the intervention and control clusters were 310 (79%) of 392 and 139 (35%) of 402, respectively, in Burkina Faso (prevalence ratio 2·29, 95% CI 1·33–3·92); 323 (82%) of 396 and 161 (44%) of 369, respectively, in Uganda (1·89, 1·70–2·11); and 56 (10%) of 535 and 30 (6%) of 485, respectively, in South Africa (1·72, 1·12–2·63). The EBF prevalences based on 7-day recall in the intervention and control clusters were 300 (77%) and 94 (23%), respectively, in Burkina Faso (3·27, 2·13–5·03); 305 (77%) and 125 (34%), respectively, in Uganda (2·30, 2·00–2·65); and 41 (8%) and 19 (4%), respectively, in South Africa (1·98, 1·30–3·02). At 24 weeks, the prevalences based on 24-h recall were 286 (73%) in the intervention cluster and 88 (22%) in the control cluster in Burkina Faso (3·33, 1·74–6·38); 232 (59%) and 57 (15%), respectively, in Uganda (3·83, 2·97–4·95); and 12 (2%) and two (<1%), respectively, in South Africa (5·70, 1·33–24·26). The prevalences based on 7-day recall were 279 (71%) in the intervention cluster and 38 (9%) in the control cluster in Burkina Faso (7·53, 4·42–12·82); 203 (51%) and 41 (11%), respectively, in Uganda (4·66, 3·35–6·49); and ten (2%) and one (<1%), respectively, in South Africa (9·83, 1·40–69·14). Diarrhoea prevalence at age 12 weeks in the intervention and control clusters was 20 (5%) and 36 (9%), respectively, in Burkina Faso (0·57, 0·27–1·22); 39 (10%) and 32 (9%), respectively, in Uganda (1·13, 0·81–1·59); and 45 (8%) and 33 (7%), respectively, in South Africa (1·16, 0·78–1·75). The prevalence at age 24 weeks in the intervention and control clusters was 26 (7%) and 32 (8%), respectively, in Burkina Faso (0·83, 0·45–1·54); 52 (13%) and 59 (16%), respectively, in Uganda (0·82, 0·58–1·15); and 54 (10%) and 33 (7%), respectively, in South Africa (1·31, 0·89–1·93)."
 

 

Add new comment

Your Priorities, Opportunities and Challenges? Complete the SURVEY

Why the focus on direct impact data?

A common challenge from policy makers, funders, community members, people directly experiencing development issues, and governments is: Demonstrate your Impact. Prove that what you are doing works. The high quality, highly credible data presented on the cards below is designed to help you answer that question for your social change, behaviour change, community engagement, communication and media for development, strategy formulation, policy engagement and funding initiatives. At this link filter the research data to your specific interests and priorities

Why a playing cards design?

There is a physical pack of cards with this data (to get a copy please request through the comment form for any card). The card approach allows for easy identification and selection of relevant direct impact data in any context. For example if talking with a donor and you need to identify proof of impact say "take a look at the 7 of Hearts". Quick access can be provided to high-quality data for many areas of your work – funding, planning, policy, advocacy, community dialogue, training, partner engagement, and more. A card deck is also engaging, easy to use and share, a conversation starter, and a resource - and they are fun and different. So we kept that design for the online images as it can serve similar purposes. 

What are the criteria for inclusion?

The impact data presented meets the following high standard for inclusion criteria:

  • Positive change or trend in a priority development issue;
  • Social change or behaviour change strategy or process;
  • Randomized Control Trial or Systematic Review methodology;
  • High quality peer review journal published;
  • Numeric impact data point
  • Published since 2010.