Early childhood development programmes vary in coordination and quality, with inadequate and inequitable access, especially for children younger than 3 years. New estimates, based on proxy measures of stunting and poverty, indicate that 250 million children (43%) younger than 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries are at risk of not reaching their developmental potential. There is therefore an urgent need to increase multisectoral coverage of quality programming that incorporates health, nutrition, security and safety, responsive caregiving, and early learning. Equitable early childhood policies and programmes are crucial for meeting Sustainable Development Goals, and for children to develop the intellectual skills, creativity, and wellbeing required to become healthy and productive adults. In this paper, the first in a three part Series on early childhood development, we examine recent scientific progress and global commitments to early childhood development. Research, programmes, and policies have advanced substantially since 2000, with new neuroscientific evidence linking early adversity and nurturing care with brain development and function throughout the life course.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a historic opportunity to implement at scale interventions to promote Early Childhood Development (ECD). While the evidence base for the importance of ECD has grown, the research is distributed across sectors, populations, and settings with diversity noted in the scope and focus. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive updated analyses of ECD interventions across five sectors: health; nutrition; education; child protection; and social protection. Our review concludes that to make interventions, successful, smarter and sustainable, they need to be implemented as multi-sectoral intervention packages anchored in "nurturing care". The recommendations emphasize that intervention packages should be applied at developmentally appropriate times during the life-course, target multiple risks, and build on existing delivery platforms for feasibility of scale-up. While interventions will continue to improve with the growth of developmental science, the evidence is now strong that parents, caregivers, and families need to be supported in providing nurturing care and protection for young children to achieve their developmental potential.

SummaryBackgroundDiarrhoea and growth faltering in early childhood are associated with subsequent adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess whether water quality, sanitation, and handwashing interventions alone or combined with nutrition interventions reduced diarrhoea or growth faltering.MethodsThe WASH Benefits Bangladesh cluster-randomised trial enrolled pregnant women from villages in rural Bangladesh and evaluated outcomes at 1-year and 2-years' follow-up. Pregnant women in geographically adjacent clusters were block-randomised to one of seven clusters: chlorinated drinking water (water); upgraded sanitation (sanitation); promotion of handwashing with soap (handwashing); combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; counselling on appropriate child nutrition plus lipid-based nutrient supplements (nutrition); combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition; and control (data collection only). Primary outcomes were caregiver-reported diarrhoea in the past 7 days among children who were in utero or younger than 3 years at enrolment and length-for-age Z score among children born to enrolled pregnant women. Masking was not possible for data collection, but analyses were masked. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCC01590095.FindingsBetween May 31, 2012, and July 7, 2013, 5551 pregnant women in 720 clusters were randomly allocated to one of seven groups. 1382 women were assigned to the control group; 698 to water; 696 to sanitation; 688 to handwashing; 702 to water, sanitation, and handwashing; 699 to nutrition; and 686 to water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. 331 (6%) women were lost to follow-up. Data on diarrhoea at year 1 or year 2 (combined) were available for 14 425 children (7331 in year 1, 7094 in year 2) and data on length-for-age Z score in year 2 were available for 4584 children (92% of living children were measured at year 2). All interventions had high adherence. Compared with a prevalence of 5·7% (200 of 3517 child weeks) in the control group, 7-day diarrhoea prevalence was lower among index children and children under 3 years at enrolment who received sanitation (61 [3·5%] of 1760; prevalence ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·46–0·81), handwashing (62 [3·5%] of 1795; 0·60, 0·45–0·80), combined water, sanitation, and handwashing (74 [3·9%] of 1902; 0·69, 0·53–0·90), nutrition (62 [3·5%] of 1766; 0·64, 0·49–0·85), and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition (66 [3·5%] of 1861; 0·62, 0·47–0·81); diarrhoea prevalence was not significantly lower in children receiving water treatment (90 [4·9%] of 1824; 0·89, 0·70–1·13). Compared with control (mean length-for-age Z score −1·79), children were taller by year 2 in the nutrition group (mean difference 0·25 [95% CI 0·15–0·36]) and in the combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition group (0·13 [0·02–0·24]). The individual water, sanitation, and handwashing groups, and combined water, sanitation, and handwashing group had no effect on linear growth.InterpretationNutrient supplementat...

SummaryBackgroundPoor nutrition and exposure to faecal contamination are associated with diarrhoea and growth faltering, both of which have long-term consequences for child health. We aimed to assess whether water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition interventions reduced diarrhoea or growth faltering.MethodsThe WASH Benefits cluster-randomised trial enrolled pregnant women from villages in rural Kenya and evaluated outcomes at 1 year and 2 years of follow-up. Geographically-adjacent clusters were block-randomised to active control (household visits to measure mid-upper-arm circumference), passive control (data collection only), or compound-level interventions including household visits to promote target behaviours: drinking chlorinated water (water); safe sanitation consisting of disposing faeces in an improved latrine (sanitation); handwashing with soap (handwashing); combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; counselling on appropriate maternal, infant, and young child feeding plus small-quantity lipid-based nutrient supplements from 6–24 months (nutrition); and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. Primary outcomes were caregiver-reported diarrhoea in the past 7 days and length-for-age Z score at year 2 in index children born to the enrolled pregnant women. Masking was not possible for data collection, but analyses were masked. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01704105.FindingsBetween Nov 27, 2012, and May 21, 2014, 8246 women in 702 clusters were enrolled and randomly assigned an intervention or control group. 1919 women were assigned to the active control group; 938 to passive control; 904 to water; 892 to sanitation; 917 to handwashing; 912 to combined water, sanitation, and handwashing; 843 to nutrition; and 921 to combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition. Data on diarrhoea at year 1 or year 2 were available for 6494 children and data on length-for-age Z score in year 2 were available for 6583 children (86% of living children were measured at year 2). Adherence indicators for sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition were more than 70% at year 1, handwashing fell to less than 25% at year 2, and for water was less than 45% at year 1 and less than 25% at year 2; combined groups were comparable to single groups. None of the interventions reduced diarrhoea prevalence compared with the active control. Compared with active control (length-for-age Z score −1·54) children in nutrition and combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition were taller by year 2 (mean difference 0·13 [95% CI 0·01–0·25] in the nutrition group; 0·16 [0·05–0·27] in the combined water, sanitation, handwashing, and nutrition group). The individual water, sanitation, and handwashing groups, and combined water, sanitation, and handwashing group had no effect on linear growth.InterpretationBehaviour change messaging combined with technologically simple interventions such as water treatment, household sanitation upgrades from unimproved to i...

This report is the second in a Series on early child development in low-income and middle-income countries and assesses the effectiveness of early child development interventions, such as parenting support and preschool enrolment. The evidence reviewed suggests that early child development can be improved through these interventions, with effects greater for programmes of higher quality and for the most vulnerable children. Other promising interventions for the promotion of early child development include children's educational media, interventions with children at high risk, and combining the promotion of early child development with conditional cash transfer programmes. Effective investments in early child development have the potential to reduce inequalities perpetuated by poverty, poor nutrition, and restricted learning opportunities. A simulation model of the potential long-term economic effects of increasing preschool enrolment to 25% or 50% in every low-income and middle-income country showed a benefit-to-cost ratio ranging from 6·4 to 17·6, depending on preschool enrolment rate and discount rate.

Background-Many governments around the world have implemented conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs with the goal of improving options for poor families through interventions in health, nutrition and education. Families enrolled in CCT programs receive cash in exchange for complying with "conditionalities" -preventive health requirements and nutrition supplementation, education and monitoring designed to improve health outcomes and promote positive behavior change. A great challenge in evaluating the effectiveness of CCT programs has been disaggregating the effects of the cash transfer component from that of the conditionalities.

IntroductionEnteric infections are common during the first years of life in low-income countries and contribute to growth faltering with long-term impairment of health and development. Water quality, sanitation, handwashing and nutritional interventions can independently reduce enteric infections and growth faltering. There is little evidence that directly compares the effects of these individual and combined interventions on diarrhoea and growth when delivered to infants and young children. The objective of the WASH Benefits study is to help fill this knowledge gap.Methods and analysisWASH Benefits includes two cluster-randomised trials to assess improvements in water quality, sanitation, handwashing and child nutrition—alone and in combination—to rural households with pregnant women in Kenya and Bangladesh. Geographically matched clusters (groups of household compounds in Bangladesh and villages in Kenya) will be randomised to one of six intervention arms or control. Intervention arms include water quality, sanitation, handwashing, nutrition, combined water+sanitation+handwashing (WSH) and WSH+nutrition. The studies will enrol newborn children (N=5760 in Bangladesh and N=8000 in Kenya) and measure outcomes at 12 and 24 months after intervention delivery. Primary outcomes include child length-for-age Z-scores and caregiver-reported diarrhoea. Secondary outcomes include stunting prevalence, markers of environmental enteropathy and child development scores (verbal, motor and personal/social). We will estimate unadjusted and adjusted intention-to-treat effects using semiparametric estimators and permutation tests.Ethics and disseminationStudy protocols have been reviewed and approved by human subjects review boards at the University of California, Berkeley, Stanford University, the International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh, the Kenya Medical Research Institute, and Innovations for Poverty Action. Independent data safety monitoring boards in each country oversee the trials. This study is funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the University of California, Berkeley.RegistrationTrial registration identifiers (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov): NCT01590095 (Bangladesh), NCT01704105 (Kenya).

Terrestrial wildlife is the primary source of meat for hundreds of millions of people throughout the developing world. Despite widespread human reliance on wildlife for food, the impact of wildlife depletion on human health remains poorly understood. Here we studied a prospective longitudinal cohort of 77 preadolescent children (under 12 y of age) in rural northeastern Madagascar and show that consuming more wildlife was associated with significantly higher hemoglobin concentrations. Our empirical models demonstrate that removing access to wildlife would induce a 29% increase in the numbers of children suffering from anemia and a tripling of anemia cases among children in the poorest households. The well-known progression from anemia to future disease demonstrates the powerful and far-reaching effects of lost wildlife access on a variety of human health outcomes, including cognitive, motor, and physical deficits. Loss of access to wildlife could arise either from the diligent enforcement of existing conservation policy or from unbridled unsustainable harvest, leading to depletion. Conservation enforcement would enact a more rapid restriction of resources, but self-depletion would potentially lead, albeit more slowly, both to irrevocable local wildlife extinctions and loss of the harvested resource. Our research quantifies costs of reduced access to wildlife for a rural community in Madagascar and illuminates pathways that may broadly link reduced natural resource access to declines in childhood health.ecosystem services | epidemiology | protected areas | hunting