Complementary feeding indicators from the World Health Organization and the Ministry of Health: agreement analysis and comparison of estimated prevalence in a cohort of children in southwestern Bahia, Brazil, 2018.
Clessiane de Brito Barbosa, Elma Izze da Silva Magalhães, Daniela da Silva Rocha
{"title":"Complementary feeding indicators from the World Health Organization and the Ministry of Health: agreement analysis and comparison of estimated prevalence in a cohort of children in southwestern Bahia, Brazil, 2018.","authors":"Clessiane de Brito Barbosa, Elma Izze da Silva Magalhães, Daniela da Silva Rocha","doi":"10.1590/S2237-96222024v33e2023556.en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the agreement between complementary feeding indicators established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Ministry of Health (MOH) and to compare the prevalence of these indicators in the first year of a child's life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>: This was a cross-sectional study in a cohort of 286 children from Vitória da Conquista, state of Bahia, Brazil; agreement between indicators and comparison between prevalences were analyzed using the Kappa coefficient and McNemar's test; the prevalence of the indicators \"introduction of complementary feeding\" (ICF), \"minimum dietary diversity\" (MDD), \"minimum meal frequency\" (MMF) and \"minimum acceptable diet\" (MAD) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>: Three indicators showed poor agreement, with only one demonstrating moderate agreement; prevalence of WHO indicators was higher than that of the MOH (ICF, 94.3% vs. 20.7%; MDD, 75.2% vs. 50.7%; MMF, 97.2% vs. 44.8%; MAD, 96.8% vs. 26.9%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The majority of indicators showed poor agreement and the prevalence of WHO indicators exceeded that of the Ministry of Health.</p>","PeriodicalId":51473,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude","volume":"33 ","pages":"e2023556"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/S2237-96222024v33e2023556.en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Multidisciplinary","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To assess the agreement between complementary feeding indicators established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Ministry of Health (MOH) and to compare the prevalence of these indicators in the first year of a child's life.
Methods: : This was a cross-sectional study in a cohort of 286 children from Vitória da Conquista, state of Bahia, Brazil; agreement between indicators and comparison between prevalences were analyzed using the Kappa coefficient and McNemar's test; the prevalence of the indicators "introduction of complementary feeding" (ICF), "minimum dietary diversity" (MDD), "minimum meal frequency" (MMF) and "minimum acceptable diet" (MAD) were calculated.
Results: : Three indicators showed poor agreement, with only one demonstrating moderate agreement; prevalence of WHO indicators was higher than that of the MOH (ICF, 94.3% vs. 20.7%; MDD, 75.2% vs. 50.7%; MMF, 97.2% vs. 44.8%; MAD, 96.8% vs. 26.9%).
Conclusion: The majority of indicators showed poor agreement and the prevalence of WHO indicators exceeded that of the Ministry of Health.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
