| Literature DB >> 24157515 |
Kedir N Turi1, Mary J Christoph, Diana S Grigsby-Toussaint.
Abstract
While undernutrition and infectious diseases are still persistent in developing countries, overweight, obesity, and associated comorbidities have become more prevalent. Uganda, a developing sub-Saharan African country, is currently experiencing the public health paradox of undernutrition and overnutrition. We utilized the 2011 Uganda Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) to examine risk factors and hot spots for underweight, overweight, and obesity among adult females (N = 2,420) and their children (N = 1,099) using ordinary least squares and multinomial logit regression and the ArcGIS Getis-Ord Gi* statistic. Overweight and obese women were significantly more likely to have overweight children, and overweight was correlated with being in the highest wealth class (OR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.99-4.35), and residing in an urban (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.34-2.29) but not a conflict prone (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.29-0.78) area. Underweight clustered significantly in the Northern and Northeastern regions, while overweight females and children clustered in the Southeast. We demonstrate that the DHS can be used to assess geographic clustering and burden of disease, thereby allowing for targeted programs and policies. Further, we pinpoint specific regions and population groups in Uganda for targeted preventive measures and treatment to reduce the burden of overweight and chronic diseases in Uganda.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24157515 PMCID: PMC3823343 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph10104967
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Sociodemographic characteristics and weight status of the sample of adult females (N = 2,420) and children (N = 1,099). Statistically significant differences were observed for all sociodemographic characteristics between normal/underweight and overweight/obese groups; *An asterisk indicates a statistically significant trend (p < 0.001).
| Variables | Normal/Underweight | % | Overweight/Obese | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Urban | 522 | 68 | 248 | 32 |
| Rural | 1,429 | 87 | 221 | 13 |
|
| ||||
| Low | 780 | 94 | 53 | 6 |
| Medium | 335 | 87 | 51 | 13 |
| High | 836 | 70 | 365 | 30 |
|
| ||||
| None | 291 | 87 | 45 | 13 |
| Primary | 1,131 | 84 | 217 | 16 |
| Secondary | 435 | 75 | 141 | 25 |
| Above secondary | 94 | 59 | 66 | 41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multinomial regression results for the association between socioeconomic and demographic risk factors and weight status of adult women in the sample (N = 2,420). References for the risk factors are never married for marital status, rural for residence, no education for education level, and low wealth for wealth class, non-cash crop producing region, and non-conflict prone region. The odds ratios use normal weight status as the reference. Normal weight is the denominator. SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval. * p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
| Variables | Underweight | Overweight and obese | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log odds ratio (SE) | Odds ratio [95% CI] | Log odds ratio (SE) | Odds ratio [95% CI] | |
| 0.022 (0.011) | 1.022 [1.000,1.045] | 0.044 *** (0.0075) | 1.045 *** [1.030,1.052] | |
| −0.66 ** (0.25) | 0.512 ** [0.32, 0.84] | 0.36 * (0.17) | 1.43 * [1.034, 1.98] | |
| 0.0029 (0.27) | 1.003 [0.59,1.69] | 0.56 *** (0.14) | 1.76 *** [1.34, 2.29] | |
| −0.028 (0.028) | 0.97 [0.92, 1.027] | 0.031 * (0.016) | 1.032 * [1.001, 1.063] | |
| −0.89 ** (0.27) | 0.41 ** [0.24, 0.69] | 0.34 (0.23) | 1.41 [0.89, 2.19] | |
| −0.92 *** (0.26) | 0.39 *** [0.24,0.66] | 1.079 *** (0.19) | 2.94 *** [1.99,4.35] | |
| −0.32 (0.22) | 0.72 [0.47, 1.11] | 0.23 (0.13) | 1.26 [0.97, 1.62] | |
| 0.17 (0.22) | 1.19 [0.78, 1.81] | −0.73 ** (0.24) | 0.48 ** [0.29, 0.78] | |
| −1.72 *** (0.35) | −3.98 *** (0.28) | |||
Figure 1The percentage of overweight mothers in Uganda shown as quintiles, by district, where darker districts experience higher levels of overweight and obesity.
Figure 2The percentage of underweight mothers in Uganda as quintiles, by district, where darker districts experience higher levels of underweight.
Figure 3Hot and cold spots of maternal BMI. Dark red dots represent hot spots of high maternal BMI, and dark blue dots represent cold spots of low maternal BMI at the 95% statistical significance level. Each dot represents a cluster of DHS sample households, while the boundaries shown are districts. Dots inside Lake Victoria are located on islands.
Figure 4Hot and cold spots of child BMI percentile. Dark red dots represent hot spots of high child BMI percentile, and dark blue dots represent cold spots of low child BMI percentile at the 95% statistical significance level. Each dot represents a cluster of DHS sample households, while the boundaries shown are districts. Dots inside Lake Victoria are located on islands.
Ordinary least square regression analysis relating socioeconomic and demographic risk factors for maternal and child weight. Reference categories are never married for marital status, no education for maternal education level, low wealth for wealth class, non-cash crop producing region, and non-conflict prone region. SE = standard error. ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.
| Variables | Coefficients | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mothers ( | SE | Children ( | SE | |
| Maternal BMI | 0.015 *** | 0.004 | ||
| Age | 0.044 *** | 0.010 | 0.038 ** | 0.012 |
| Marital status: | 1.002 *** | 0.21 | ||
| Residence: | 1.079 *** | 0.19 | ||
| Maternal education level | 0.054 *** | 0.022 | −0.003 | 0.003 |
| Wealth class: | 0.75 *** | 0.24 | ||
| Wealth class: | 1.61 *** | 0.23 | ||
| Cash crop producing region: | 0.75 | 0.18 | ||
| Conflict prone region: | −0.81 | 0.23 | ||
| Intercept | 18.61 *** | 0.31 | −0.003 | 0.003 |
| R2 | 18.17% | 4.52% | ||