| Literature DB >> 25889557 |
Ayo Stephen Adebowale1,2, Martin Enoch Palamuleni3, Clifford Obby Odimegwu4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Burkina Faso (BF) and Congo Democratic Republic (CDR) are among the top-ten poverty and hunger stricken countries globally. The influence of poverty and hunger on health is enormous. The objectives of the study are to; examine the association between poverty and nutritional status, it also identified socio-demographic and health related mediating factors that contribute to the relationship between poverty and poor nutritional status. The study focused on married or cohabiting women aged 15-49 years and utilized 2010 and 2007 DHS dataset from BF and CDR respectively.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25889557 PMCID: PMC4331373 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-015-1001-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Figure 1Nutritional status of married or cohabiting women in Burkina Faso by wealth index.
Figure 2Nutritional status of married or cohabiting women in Congo Democratic Republic by wealth index.
Figure 3Nutritional status of all married or cohabiting women in Burkina Faso and Congo Democratic Republic.
Percentage distribution of married or cohabiting women in Burkina Faso and Congo Democratic Republic according to level of poor nutritional status by background characteristics
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Total | 12.8(376) | 2939 | 14.0(181) | 1294 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Poverty status | 72.039*** | 15.300*** | ||||
| Poor | 19.4(195) | 1006 | (p<0.001) | 17.9(87) | 487 | (p<0.001) |
| Middle | 13.7(73) | 532 | 15.8(41) | 259 | ||
| Rich | 7.7(108) | 1401 | 9.7(53) | 548 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Age | 23.511*** | 2.227 | ||||
| 15-24 | 12.6(68) | 540 | (p<0.001) | 14.8(31) | 209 | (0.527) |
| 25-29 | 6.3(26) | 413 | 13.7(28) | 205 | ||
| 30-39 | 12.5(117) | 933 | 12.1(50) | 414 | ||
| 40-49 | 15.7(165) | 1053 | 15.5(72) | 466 | ||
| Mean±σ | 35.8±9.7 | 34.4±9.3 | 35.3±9.5 | 34.7±9.0 | ||
| Children ever born | 24.049*** | 0.046 | ||||
| None | 12.9(40) | 311 | (p<0.001) | 14.1(23) | 163 | (0.997) |
| 1-2 | 8.4(53) | 633 | 14.1(43) | 305 | ||
| 3-4 | 11.0(74) | 675 | 13.6(40) | 294 | ||
| 5+ | 15.8(209) | 1320 | 14.1(75) | 532 | ||
| Mean±σ | 4.8±2.9 | 4.2±2.9 | 4.0±2.9 | 4.1±3.0 | ||
| Births in the last 3 years | 0.045 | 0.228 | ||||
| None | 12.9(283) | 2199 | (0.832) | 14.3(134) | 939 | (0.633) |
| 1+ | 12.6(93) | 740 | 13.2(47) | 355 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Residence | 59.703*** | 5.887* | ||||
| Urban | 5.9(55) | 940 | (p<0.001) | 11.4(68) | 594 | (0.015) |
| Rural | 16.1(321) | 1999 | 16.1(113) | 700 | ||
| Education | 40.405*** | 8.608* | ||||
| None | 14.9(341) | 2295 | (p<0.001) | 18.1(56) | 309 | (0.014) |
| Primary | 6.1(23) | 376 | 14.5(73) | 503 | ||
| Secondary+ | 4.5(12) | 268 | 10.8(52) | 482 | ||
| Husband’s education | 42.460*** | 15.570*** | ||||
| None | 15.0(331) | 2206 | (p<0.001) | 24.4(30) | 123 | (p<0.001) |
| Primary | 4.9(18) | 366 | 15.8(52) | 329 | ||
| Secondary+ | 6.5(22) | 341 | 11.4(90) | 791 | ||
| Work status | 5.882* | 3.777 | ||||
| Not working | 16.2(80) | 494 | (0.015) | 10.5(30) | 286 | (0.052) |
| Working | 12.2(293) | 2405 | 15.0(151) | 1006 | ||
| Marital status | 5.549* | 0.770 | ||||
| Married | 13.1(366) | 2787 | (0.018) | 13.6(147) | 1080 | (0.380) |
| Cohabiting | 6.6(10) | 152 | 15.9(34) | 214 | ||
|
| ||||||
| Anaemia status | 8.920** | 5.298* | ||||
| Not anaemic | 11.1(172) | 1550 | (0.003) | 11.8(75) | 635 | (0.021) |
| Anaemic | 14.8(200) | 1350 | 16.3(100) | 612 | ||
***Significant at 0.1%; **Significant at 1%;*Significant at 5%.
Logistic regression models of the relationship between poverty status and under-nourish among married or cohabiting women in Burkina Faso (BF) and Congo Democratic Republic
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Poor | 2.9*** | 2.0*** | 2.6*** | 1.8*** | 1.8* | 2.8*** | 1.9*** | 1.7*** | 1.6 | |
| Middle | 1.9*** | 1.8*** | 1.8*** | 1.2 | 1.8* | 1.8*** | 1.8** | 1.2 | 1.8* | |
| Rich | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| 15-24 | 1.1 | 0.9 | ||||||||
| 25-29 | 0.5* | 0.5* | ||||||||
| 30-39 | 0.9 | 0.9 | ||||||||
| 40-49 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| None | 0.8 | 0.9 | ||||||||
| 1-2 | 0.6* | 0.7 | ||||||||
| 3-4 | 0.9 | 0.9 | ||||||||
| 5+ | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Urban | 0.5** | 1.3 | 0.5** | 1.2 | ||||||
| Rural | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| None | 1.9 | 1.1 | 1.7 | 1.1 | ||||||
| Primary | 1.1 | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 | ||||||
| Secondary+ | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| None | 1.2 | 2.1** | 0.9 | 2.3** | ||||||
| Primary | 0.4* | 1.3 | 0.4* | 1.3 | ||||||
| Secondary+ | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Not working | 1.6** | 1.6** | ||||||||
| Working | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Married | 0.9 | 0.9 | ||||||||
| Cohabiting | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Not anaemic | 0.8* | 0.7* | 0.8 | 0.7 | ||||||
| Anaemic | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
***Significant at 0.1%; **Significant at 1%; *Significant at 5%; BUF: Burkina Faso; CDR: Congo Democratic Republic.