Effects of unconditional cash transfers on the outcome of treatment for severe acute malnutrition (SAM): a cluster-randomised trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Table 7 Failure to achieve and maintain nutritional recovery over a 6-month period (intention to treat)

Failure of nutritional recovery^a	Intervention arm	Control arm	P value
Number (%)^b	734 (49.6)	747 (50.4)	P value
Number of events/child-weeks at risk	144/16,408	457/13,257
Incidence rate per 100 child-weeks (95% CI)	0.88 (0.73–1.02)	3.45 (3.13 – 3.76)
Incidence rate ratio (95% CI)^c	0.31 (0.21–0.46)	1.00 (Reference)	<0.001
Unadjusted HR (95% CI)	0.24 (0.15–0.39)	1.00 (Reference)	<0.001
Adjusted HR (95% CI)^d	0.24 (0.15–0.39)	1.00 (Reference)	<0.001

^aFailure to achieve and maintain nutritional recovery during treatment and follow-up to 6 months from enrolment was defined as dead, non-response to treatment after 12 weeks, a defaulter, a relapse to either SAM or MAM or unknown at 6 months
^bNumber of children contributing to unadjusted analysis
^cComputed by using a mixed-effects Poisson regression model, with health centre as random effects
^dFrom marginal Cox proportional hazards models where the outcome variable is time until first event and time is calendar week. 95% CIs used robust estimates of the variance to account for clustering at the health centre level, and P value was performed with the robust score test. Co-variates in the adjusted model included the household size, the IDDS score and the school achievement of the mother

ISSN: 1741-7015