4.4 Article

Acceptability of 12 fortified balanced energy protein supplements - Insights from Burkina Faso

期刊

MATERNAL AND CHILD NUTRITION
卷 17, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/mcn.13067

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1175213]
  2. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1175213] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that pregnant women prefer sweet over salty/savoury products and are more inclined towards products they are familiar with, while also being sensitive to product odours. Although household food sharing practices may impact supplement use, most women denied any intention to share the products.
Poor maternal nutrition contributes to poor birth outcomes, including low birth weight and small for gestational age births. Fortified balanced energy protein (BEP) supplements may be beneficial, although evidence is limited. This mixed method study, conducted among pregnant women in Burkina Faso, is part of a larger clinical trial that seeks to understand the impact of fortified BEP supplements on pregnancy outcomes and child growth. The formative research reported here, a single-meal rapid assessment of 12 product formulations, sought to understand product preferences for provision of BEP supplements and contextual factors that might affect product acceptability and use. Results indicate a preference for products perceived as sweet rather than salty/savoury and for products perceived as familiar, as well as a sensitivity to product odours. Women expressed a willingness and intention to use the products even if they did not like them, because of the health benefits for their babies. Data also indicate that household food sharing practices may impact supplement use, although most women denied any intention to share the products. Sharing behaviour should therefore be monitored, and strategies to avoid sharing should be developed during the succeeding parts of the research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据