4.6 Article

Uptake of iron supplements and anemia during pregnancy in Nigeria

期刊

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 44, 期 1, 页码 111-120

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdaa168

关键词

anemia; compliance; iron-folate supplementation; Nigeria

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed data on hemoglobin and anemia from married women in Nigeria and found that socio-demographic factors were correlated with the incidence of maternal anemia and compliance with recommended uptake of micronutrients.
Background Uptake of iron-folate supplementation for at least 90 days during pregnancy is recommended as a cost-effective way of reducing iron deficiency anemia, the commonest form of anemia among women of childbearing ages. The paper examines the level of compliance in Nigeria. Methods We analysed a sample of 14 740 married women aged 15-49 years from the 2018 Nigerian Demographic and Health Survey with available data on hemoglobin and anemia. Multinomial logistic regression models were used to establish associations between socio-demographic characteristics, compliance with recommended uptake of micronutrients and anemia status of the mothers. Results A number of socio-demographic factors, namely maternal age, type of residence, education, wealth, among others correlated with incidence of maternal anemia as well as compliance with recommended uptake of micronutrient to protect against anemia. For instance, whereas 46.3% of mothers from rural backgrounds were not anemic, 39.0% of those with urban background were not anemic (P < 0.001). More than half (56.2%) of mothers in the richest households were anemic compared with about a third (34.6%) of mothers in the poorest household who were not anemic (P < 0.001). The urban dwellers, richer and more educated mothers complied more with the uptake of iron-folate supplements to protect against anemia during pregnancy (P < 0.001). The younger mothers (15-29 years) were more likely to comply with iron intake (odds ratio: 1.150 (1.060-1.247)).

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

4.6
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