4.5 Article

Nutrient adequacy and dietary diversity in rural Mali: association and determinants

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 58, 期 4, 页码 594-604

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601853

关键词

dietary quality; nutrient adequacy; dietary diversity; food frequency questionnaire; Mali; Africa

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To examine the association between nutrient adequacy and dietary diversity, and to assess and compare the determinants for the two constructs in an adult population in rural Mali. Design: Cross-sectional study assessing food intake by a validated 7-day quantitative food frequency questionnaire. Two different dietary diversity indexes were created: food variety score (FVS), a simple count of food items, and diet diversity score (DDS) a count of food groups. Mean adequacy ratio, the mean ratio of intake to recommended intake (each truncated at one) of energy and nine nutrients, was calculated as an indicator of nutrient adequacy. Information on household and individual characteristics, including demography, socioeconomic conditions and food production strategies was obtained using precoded questionnaires. Setting: Bafoulabe district, Kayes region, Western Mali. Subjects: In total, 502 subjects (55% women) aged 15-45 y from 319 different households. Results: Both FVS and DDS had a positive correlation with mean adequacy ratio ( MAR). Multivariate analysis ( linear regression) showed that the most important factors explaining MAR was the number of milk products, vegetables and green leaves consumed, as well as sex and the number of crops produced in the household. Dietary diversity was associated with socioeconomic status, residence and age. Conclusion: Dietary diversity is useful as an indicator of nutrient adequacy. It is important to examine how various food groups contribute to the nutrient adequacy of the diet in an area. Sponsorship: The Norwegian Research Council and The Stromme Foundation funded the project.

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

4.5
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