4.3 Article

Paternal smoking is associated with increased risk of child malnutrition among poor urban families in Indonesia

Journal

PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages 7-15

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S136898000722292X

Keywords

food; malnutrition; poverty; smoking; tobacco

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Paternal smoking is highly prevalent in Asia, and tobacco may account for a large proportion of household expenditures among poor families. We sought to characterise the relationship between paternal smoking, child malnutrition and food expenditures. Design: Data on smoking, household expenditures and child malnutrition were examined in a stratified multistage cluster sample of households in the Indonesia nutrition surveillance system. Main outcome measures were child wasting (weight-for-height Z-score <-2), underweight (weight-for-age Z-score <-2) and stunting (height-for-age Z-score <-2), and severe wasting, underweight and stunting (defined by respective Z-scores <-3). Setting: In total, 175 583 households from urban slum areas in Indonesia. Subjects: Children 0-59 months of age. Results: The prevalence of paternal smoking was 73.8%. After adjusting for child gender and age, maternal age and education, and weekly per capita household expenditures, paternal smoking was associated with child stunting (odds ratio (OR) = 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.14, P < 0.0001), severe wasting (OR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.03-1-33, P = 0.018) and severe stunting (OR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.15, P < 0.001). In households where the father was a smoker, tobacco accounted for 22% of weekly per capita household expenditures, with less money spent on food compared with households in which the father was a non-smoker. Conclusions: Among poor families in urban slum areas of Indonesia, paternal smoking diverts household money from food to tobacco and exacerbates child malnutrition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available