RESULTS
cough, infectious disease, pneumonia
REGRESSION, INFECTIOUS DISEASE, SECONDARY, PNEUMONIA
Baseline data collection covered 137 clusters, censused 99 576 people, and surveyed 15 884 women of reproductive age who provided outcome data on 15 855 children under five years (Figure S2 in the Baseline cluster-level characteristics and summaries of the outcomes of interest*CHW – community health care workers, IQR – interquartile range, PHC – primary health centre*Data are presented as n (%) unless otherwise specified.†CHWs are stationed/posted in some communities at baseline and may also serve members from neighbouring/satellite communities.‡There are two intervention clusters with no sick children at baseline.Prompt treatment within the health sector increased from a median of 19% across all clusters at baseline to 61% at 12 months, 44% at 24 months, and 52% at 36 months, with similar trends in both arms (Box plots representing the variability in cluster summaries of the primary and secondary health care utilisation outcomes in intervention and control arms at each time point.At the 12-month follow-up, the odds of receiving prompt treatment within the health sector were 22% higher in intervention compared to control clusters (AORCluster-specific intervention effects on primary and secondary health care utilisation outcomes, including absolute risks in each arm, during the three-year trial period overall and at each follow-up time point*AOR*Two regression models are presented here: regression model 1 controlled for the time effect †Regression model 1.‡Regression model 2.The results suggested no differential effect by time point for health sector evaluation and any care, although the largest effects were seen at 12 months (Heterogeneous treatment effects by cluster population size, cluster distance to nearest PHC, and household wealth on the primary outcome, prompt treatment within the health sector, during the three-year trial period overall*PHC – public health centre, LR – likelihood ratio, AOR*We ran three separate models, one for each of the predefined effect modifiers that included an interaction term between treatment arm and the modifier. We report the results of the LR tests for interaction between arm and modifier in each model. All models controlled for the same covariates as the main model for overall effects during the three-year trial period; we removed the baseline cluster-level summary of wealth in the models that assessed heterogeneous effects by this variable at the household level.†For 20% of sick child-year observations included in the analysis, their household wealth was measured during the follow-up period rather than at baseline. The co-intervention in both arms to remove user fees could have influenced household wealth in the follow-up period.During the trial, 47% of sick child-year observations met the per-protocol definition (at least two CHW home visits in the preceding month) in the intervention arm, while 78% met the definition (no CHW home visits in the preceding month) in the control arm (Table S11 in the Per-protocol subgroup estimates for the primary and secondary health care utilisation outcomes, excluding observations in the intervention arm that did not receive at least two CHW home visits in the month preceding the survey, during the three-year trial period overall and at each follow-up time point*AOR*Two regression models are presented here: regression model 1 controlled for the time effect †Regression model 1.‡Regression model 2.Finally, infectious disease prevalence increased in both arms compared to baseline, two-fold for cough and suspected pneumonia (Figure S3 in the 