| Literature DB >> 29047365 |
Vanessa M Oddo1,2, Sara N Bleich3, Keshia M Pollack4, Pamela J Surkan5, Noel T Mueller6, Jessica C Jones-Smith7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal employment has increased in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) and is a hypothesized risk factor for maternal overweight due to increased income and behavioral changes related to time allocation. However, few studies have investigated this relationship in LMIC.Entities:
Keywords: Low- and middle-income countries; Maternal employment; Nutrition transition; Overweight
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29047365 PMCID: PMC6389244 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-017-0522-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Descriptive characteristics of mothers participating in selected Demographic and Health Surveys
| N (%)a | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | Year | Nb | Formally Employed ( | Informally Employed ( | ≥ Primary Education ( | Overweight ( |
| Bangladesh | 2011 | 6224 | 564 (9.0%) | 130 (2.1%) | 3929 (63%) | 776 (12%) |
| Benin | 2011–12 | 6372 | 2658 (42%) | 1738 (28%) | 999 (16%) | 1672 (27%) |
| Burkina Faso | 2010 | 4204 | 659 (16%) | 2802 (66%) | 348 (8.2%) | 381 (9.0%) |
| Cambodia | 2014 | 3477 | 1527 (43%) | 1165 (33%) | 1578 (44%) | 610 (17%) |
| Cameroon | 2011 | 2965 | 962 (32%) | 1301 (44%) | 1530 (51%) | 928 (31%) |
| Colombiae | 2010 | 11,809 | 4071 (38%) | 2734 (25%) | 9386 (87%) | 4832 (45%) |
| Comoros | 2012 | 1468 | 341 (23%) | 286 (19%) | 584 (39%) | 703 (47%) |
| Cote d’Ivoire | 2011–12 | 2017 | 544 (28%) | 900 (47%) | 355 (19%) | 444 (23%) |
| DRC | 2013–14 | 4293 | 697 (16%) | 2753 (65%) | 2014 (48%) | 638 (15%) |
| Dominican Republic | 2013 | 2385 | 1147 (48%) | 227 (10%) | 1846 (78%) | 1202 (51%) |
| Egypt | 2014 | 9765 | 1090 (11%) | 238 (2.4%) | 7517 (77%) | 7762 (80%) |
| Ethiopia | 2011 | 6095 | 874 (14%) | 2659 (42%) | 434 (6.8%) | 276 (4.3%) |
| Ghana | 2014 | 1760 | 807 (47%) | 612 (36%) | 998 (59%) | 703 (41%) |
| Guinea | 2012 | 1978 | 470 (24%) | 1120 (57%) | 239 (12%) | 347 (18%) |
| Haiti | 2012 | 2879 | 879 (32%) | 845 (30%) | 1259 (45%) | 734 (26%) |
| Honduras | 2011–12 | 7368 | 2262 (32%) | 1219 (17%) | 4786 (68%) | 3684 (53%) |
| Kyrgyz Republicf | 2012 | 2686 | 559 (22%) | 86 (3.4%) | 2261 (89%) | 858 (34%) |
| Lesotho | 2014 | 1034 | 248 (25%) | 153 (15%) | 814 (81%) | 463 (46%) |
| Liberia | 2013 | 2110 | 562 (30%) | 610 (32%) | 640 (34%) | 464 (24%) |
| Malawi | 2010 | 3026 | 508 (17%) | 1750 (57%) | 789 (26%) | 502 (16%) |
| Mali | 2012–13 | 2308 | 301 (13%) | 658 (28%) | 220 (9.4%) | 382 (16%) |
| Mozambique | 2011 | 5848 | 601 (10%) | 2296 (38%) | 1157 (19%) | 812 (13%) |
| Namibia | 2013 | 1376 | 440 (34%) | 126 (10%) | 1012 (79%) | 416 (32%) |
| Nepal | 2011 | 1681 | 182 (11%) | 1073 (62%) | 738 (43%) | 173 (10%) |
| Niger | 2012 | 2771 | 316 (11%) | 413 (15%) | 172 (6.1%) | 504 (18%) |
| Nigeria | 2013 | 15,052 | 8243 (54%) | 2598 (17%) | 7288 (48%) | 3772 (25%) |
| Pakistan | 2012–13 | 2106 | 292 (14%) | 303 (14%) | 815 (38%) | 711 (33%) |
| Perug | 2012 | 7202 | 3267 (49%) | 1341 (20%) | 5542 (82%) | 4041 (60%) |
| Rwanda | 2010 | 2721 | 277 (10%) | 2210 (80%) | 649 (24%) | 439 (16%) |
| Sierra Leone | 2013 | 3194 | 583 (18%) | 2071 (64%) | 706 (22%) | 520 (16%) |
| Tajikistan | 2012 | 2957 | 334 (11%) | 496 (16%) | 2902 (95%) | 845 (28%) |
| Tanzania | 2010 | 4269 | 750 (17%) | 3103 (71%) | 2772 (63%) | 821 (19%) |
| Timor-Leste | 2009–10 | 4724 | 317 (6.7%) | 1478 (31%) | 2431 (51%) | 281 (5.9%) |
| Togo | 2013–14 | 2073 | 1046 (53%) | 633 (32%) | 638 (32%) | 559 (28%) |
| Uganda | 2011 | 1187 | 372 (32%) | 540 (47%) | 419 (36%) | 203 (18%) |
| Yemen | 2013 | 8476 | 312 (3.7%) | 512 (6.1%) | 3961 (48%) | 2217 (27%) |
| Zambia | 2013–14 | 7520 | 1414 (19%) | 2915 (39%) | 4001 (53%) | 1652 (22%) |
| Zimbabwe | 2010–11 | 3388 | 522 (15%) | 876 (26%) | 2931 (87%) | 1003 (30%) |
| Total | 162,768 | 40,998 (25%) | 46,970 (29%) | 80,659 (50%) | 47,330 (29%) | |
DRC Democratic Republic of Congo
aNumber of observations (percentage) were estimated using the country sample weight
bTotal sample size in each country and by subgroup (e.g. total formally employed) are unweighted
cType of employment was based on 4 following indicators: employment during the last 12 months (yes, no); aggregate occupation category (skilled, unskilled); type of earnings (cash only, cash and in-kind, in-kind only, unpaid); and seasonality of employment (all year, seasonally/occasionally)
dOverweight was defined as BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2
eEmployment type was based on employment status, occupation category and earnings only because seasonality of employment was not queried in this survey
fMaternal education level was dichotomized as < secondary level of education complete and ≥ secondary level of education complete
gEmployment type was based on employment status, type of earnings, and seasonality only because occupation type was not queried in this survey
Pooled odds ratio for the relationship between formal and informal maternal employment and overweighta
|
| |
|---|---|
| Pooled Odds Ratio | |
| Formal Employmentc | |
| All low- and middle-income countries | 1.3 (1.2, 1.4) |
| Countries where the association did not vary by education | 1.2 (1.1, 1.4) |
| Countries where the association varied by education: low educationd | 1.5 (1.1, 1.9) |
| Countries where the association varied by education: high educationd | 1.2 (1.0, 1.3) |
| Informal Employmentc | |
| All low- and middle-income countries | 0.72 (0.64, 0.81) |
| Countries where the association did not vary by education | 0.71 (0.60, 0.83) |
| Countries where the association varied by education: low educationd | 0.74 (0.62, 0.88) |
| Countries where the association varied by education: high educationd | 0.63 (0.50, 0.79) |
aPooled odds ratios (POR) were generated using meta-analysis and pool estimates across country subgroups. Overweight was defined as BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2. All models were adjusted for maternal age (years), parity, marital status (married, not married), number of household members, child age (months), and substitute childcare provider (yes, no). Models which did not retain the employmentXeducation interaction term were also adjusted for maternal education (< primary education, ≥ primary education completed)
bTotal sample size is unweighted
cType of employment was based on 4 indicators: 1) employment during the last 12 months (yes, no); 2) aggregate occupation category (skilled, unskilled); 3) type of earnings (cash only, cash and in-kind, in-kind only, unpaid); and 4) seasonality of employment (all year, seasonally/occasionally)
dThe employmentXeducation interaction term was retained in the following countries: Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Honduras, Kyrgyz Republic, Mozambique, Nigeria, Peru, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Zimbabwe. The relative difference in the employment-overweight association, comparing mothers with high to low education for formal employment was: POR = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.98) and for informal employment was: POR = 0.81 (95% CI: 0.58, 1.1)
Fig. 1Adjusted logistic regression for the relationship between maternal employment and overweight, in countries where the association did not vary by education1, 2. 1Country-specific odds ratios were estimated using logistic regression to test the relationship between employment and overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2). Overall odds ratios were generated using meta-analysis and pool estimates across countries.2 Models were adjusted for maternal age (years), parity, marital status (married, not married), number of household members, child age (months), substitute childcare provider (yes, no) and maternal education (< primary education, ≥ primary education)
Fig. 2Adjusted logistic regression for the relationship between maternal employment and overweight, in countries where the association varied by education1, 2. DRC = Democratic Republic of Congo.1 Country-specific odds ratios were estimated using logistic regression to test the relationship employment and overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2). Overall odds ratios were generated using meta-analysis and pool estimates across countries.2 All models were adjusted for maternal age (years), parity, marital status (married, not married), number of household members, child age (months), and substitute childcare provider (yes, no). Models included an employmentXeducation interaction term (< primary education, ≥ primary education completed)