世界卫生组织和卫生部的补充喂养指标:2018年巴西巴伊亚州西南部儿童队列中的协议分析和估计流行率比较。

IF 2.5 Q1 Multidisciplinary
Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude Pub Date : 2024-03-15 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/S2237-96222024v33e2023556.en
Clessiane de Brito Barbosa, Elma Izze da Silva Magalhães, Daniela da Silva Rocha
{"title":"世界卫生组织和卫生部的补充喂养指标:2018年巴西巴伊亚州西南部儿童队列中的协议分析和估计流行率比较。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

目的评估世界卫生组织(WHO)和巴西卫生部(MOH)制定的辅食添加指标之间的一致性,并比较这些指标在儿童出生后第一年的流行率:这是一项横断面研究,对象是巴西巴伊亚州 Vitória da Conquista 的 286 名儿童;使用 Kappa 系数和 McNemar 检验分析了指标之间的一致性和流行率之间的比较;计算了 "添加辅食"(ICF)、"最低饮食多样性"(MDD)、"最低进餐频率"(MMF)和 "最低可接受饮食"(MAD)等指标的流行率:结果::三项指标的一致性较差,只有一项指标的一致性达到中等水平;世界卫生组织指标的流行率高于卫生部指标的流行率(ICF,94.3%对20.7%;MDD,75.2%对50.7%;MMF,97.2%对44.8%;MAD,96.8%对26.9%):结论:大多数指标的一致性较差,世界卫生组织指标的流行率超过了卫生部指标的流行率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude
Epidemiologia e Servicos de Saude PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
21 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信