ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Implementing a multilevel, multicomponent intervention to engage fathers in complementary feeding in Northern Nigeria: Perceptions of deliverers and recipients.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Alive & Thrive multilevel, multicomponent intervention to engage fathers in complementary feeding in Kaduna State, Nigeria previously showed significant increases in complementary feeding practices for children. This analysis explores the perceptions of intervention deliverers and recipients to inform future spread. The intervention components included counseling cards, home visits, feeding bowls, texts/prerecorded messages, posters, leaflets, sermon guides, talking points, radio and television spots. In-depth interviews (24) were conducted with intervention deliverers (community health extension workers, community and religious leaders) and focus group discussions (16) with recipients (parents of children 6-23 months) from 6 rural and urban wards. Participants were purposively sampled; parents were not selected as couples. Eligibility for CHEWs and CRLs included being ≥ 18 years and having participated in intervention implementation. Eligibility for parents included being ≥18 years (or married mothers 15-17 years), having a biological child 6-23 months, and receiving the intervention. Transcripts were coded descriptively in Atlas.ti and the results were mapped to the domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2.0. For the innovation domain, intervention deliverers and recipients reported high acceptability and appropriateness of the intervention components. For the outer domain, the intervention was perceived to be influenced by values and beliefs (fathers' roles as providers), systemic conditions (economic hardships), and critical incidents (COVID-19). The intervention was also influenced by relational connections, compatibility, intervention deliverers and recipients, teaming, tailoring strategies and engaging for the domains of inner setting, individuals, and implementation process, respectively. For implementation strategies, intervention deliverers liked the training and monthly meetings where they shared experiences and problem solved. The Alive & Thrive intervention in Kaduna State, Nigeria was acceptable, appropriate, and feasible for intervention deliverers and recipients.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.