Effectiveness of cash-plus programmes on early childhood outcomes compared to cash transfers alone: A systematic review and meta-analysis in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: To strengthen the impact of cash transfers, these interventions have begun to be packaged as cash-plus programmes, combining cash with additional transfers, interventions, or services. The intervention's complementary ("plus") components aim to improve cash transfer effectiveness by targeting mediating outcomes or the availability of supplies or services. This study examined whether cash-plus interventions for infants and children <5 are more effective than cash alone in improving health and well-being. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Forty-two databases, donor agencies, grey literature sources, and trial registries were systematically searched, yielding 5,097 unique articles (as of 06 April 2021). Randomised and quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion if the intervention package aimed to improve outcomes for children <5 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and combined a cash transfer with an intervention targeted to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 (No Hunger), SDG3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG4 (Education), or SDG16 (Violence Prevention), had at least one group receiving cash-only, examined outcomes related to child-focused SDGs, and was published in English. Risk of bias was appraised using Cochrane Risk of Bias and ROBINS-I Tools. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for a cash-plus intervention category when there were at least 3 trials with the same outcome. The review was preregistered with PROSPERO (CRD42018108017). Seventeen studies were included in the review and 11 meta-analysed. Most interventions operated during the first 1,000 days of the child's life and were conducted in communities facing high rates of poverty and often, food insecurity. Evidence was found for 10 LMICs, where most researchers used randomised, longitudinal study designs (n = 14). Five intervention categories were identified, combining cash with nutrition behaviour change communication (BCC, n = 7), food transfers (n = 3), primary healthcare (n = 2), psychosocial stimulation (n = 7), and child protection (n = 4) interventions. Comparing cash-plus to cash alone, meta-analysis results suggest Cash + Food Transfers are more effective in improving height-for-age (d = 0.08 SD (0.03, 0.14), p = 0.02) with significantly reduced odds of stunting (OR = 0.82 (0.74, 0.92), p = 0.01), but had no added impact in improving weight-for-height (d = -0.13 (-0.42, 0.16), p = 0.24) or weight-for-age z-scores (d = -0.06 (-0.28, 0.15), p = 0.43). There was no added impact above cash alone from Cash + Nutrition BCC on anthropometrics; Cash + Psychosocial Stimulation on cognitive development; or Cash + Child Protection on parental use of violent discipline or exclusive positive parenting. Narrative synthesis evidence suggests that compared to cash alone, Cash + Primary Healthcare may have greater impacts in reducing mortality and Cash + Food Transfers in preventing acute malnutrition in crisis contexts. The main limitations of this review are the few numbers of studies that compared cash-plus interventions against cash alone and the potentially high heterogeneity between study findings. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that few cash-plus combinations were more effective than cash transfers alone. Cash combined with food transfers and primary healthcare show the greatest signs of added effectiveness. More research is needed on when and how cash-plus combinations are more effective than cash alone, and work in this field must ensure that these interventions improve outcomes among the most vulnerable children.

Interventions to reduce gender-based violence among young people living with or affected by HIV/AIDS in low-income and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE(S): This study explored the effectiveness of gender-based violence (GBV) interventions on young people living with or affected by HIV in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We pre-registered a protocol, then searched 13 databases and grey literature. We screened randomized and quasi-experimental studies (n = 2199) of young people (aged 10-24) living with or affected by HIV in LMICs. Outcomes were GBV and/or GBV-related attitudes. We appraised the data for risk of bias and quality of evidence. Narrative syntheses and multilevel random effects meta-analyses were conducted. RESULTS: We included 18 studies evaluating 21 interventions. Intervention arms were categorized as: sexual health and social empowerment (SHSE; n = 7); SHSE combined with economic strengthening (n = 4); self-defence (n = 3); safer schools (n = 2); economic strengthening only (n = 2); GBV sensitization (n = 2) and safer schools and parenting (n = 1). Risk of bias was moderate/high and quality of evidence low. Narrative syntheses indicated promising effects on GBV exposure, but no or mixed effects on GBV perpetration and attitudes for self-defence and GBV sensitization interventions. Safer school interventions showed no effects. For SHSE interventions and SHSE combined with economic strengthening, meta-analyses showed a small reduction in GBV exposure but not perpetration. Economic-only interventions had no overall effect. CONCLUSION: SHSE, SHSE plus and self-defence and gender sensitization interventions may be effective for GBV exposure and GBV-related attitudes but not for GBV perpetration. However, the quality of evidence is poor. Future intervention research must include both boys and girls, adolescents living with HIV and key populations.

National ethics guidance in Sub-Saharan Africa on the collection and use of human biological specimens: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Ethical and regulatory guidance on the collection and use of human biospecimens (HBS) for research forms an essential component of national health systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where rapid advances in genetic- and genomic-based technologies are fueling clinical trials involving HBS and the establishment of large-scale biobanks. METHODS: An extensive multi-level search for publicly available ethics regulatory guidance was conducted for each SSA country. A second review documented active trials listed in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform as of January 2015 in which HBS collection was specified in the protocol. Findings were combined to determine the extent to which countries that are study sites for HBS-related research are supported by regulatory guidance language on the collection, use, ownership and storage of biospecimens. RESULTS: Of the 49 SSA countries, 29 had some form of national ethics guidance, yet only 17 provided language relating to HBS-related research, with specific guidance on consent (14), ownership (6), reuse (10), storage (9), and export/import/transfer (13). Ten countries accounted for 84 % of the active clinical trials involving the collection of HBS in SSA. All except one of these countries were found to have some national guidance in the form of regulations, codes of ethics, and/or standard operating procedures; however, only seven of the ten offered any language specific to HBS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the fact that the bulk of registered clinical trials in SSA involving HBS, as well as existing and proposed sites for biorepositories under the H3Africa Initiative, are currently situated in countries with the most complete ethics and regulatory guidance, variability in the regulations themselves may create challenges for planned and future pan-African collaborations and may require legislative action at the national level to revise. Countries in SSA that still lack regulatory guidance on HBS will require extensive health system strengthening in ethics governance before they can be full participants in the modern research enterprise.