首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>SSM - Population Health >Are children in female-headed households at a disadvantage? An analysis of immunization coverage and stunting prevalence: in 95 low- and middle-income countries
【2h】

Are children in female-headed households at a disadvantage? An analysis of immunization coverage and stunting prevalence: in 95 low- and middle-income countries

机译:是女性家庭的儿童在劣势吗?免疫覆盖率和脾气暴躁率分析:95个低收入和中等收入国家

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Studies of inequalities in child health have given limited attention to household structure and headship. The few existing reports on child outcomes in male and female-headed households have produced inconsistent results. The aim of our analyses was to provide a global view of the influence of sex of the household head on child health in cross-sectional surveys from up to 95 LMICs. Studied outcomes were full immunization coverage in children aged 12–23 months and stunting prevalence in under-five children. We analyzed the most recent nationally-representative surveys for each country (since 2010) with available data. After initial exploratory analyses, we focused on three types of households: a) male-headed household (MHH) comprised 73.1% of all households in the pooled analyses; b) female Headed Household (FHH) with at least one adult male represented 9.8% of households; and c) FHH without an adult male accounted for 15.0% of households. Our analyses also included the following covariates: wealth index, education of the child’s mother and urban/rural residence. Meta-analytic approaches were used to calculate pooled effects across the countries with MHH as the reference category. Regarding full immunization, the pooled prevalence ratio for FHH (any male) was 0.99 (0.97; 1.01) and that for FHH (no male) was 0.99 (0.97; 1.02). For stunting prevalence, the pooled prevalence ratio for FHH (any male) was 1.00 (0.98; 1.02) and for FHH (no male) was 1.00 (0.98; 1.02). Adjustment for covariates did not lead to any noteworthy change in the results. No particular patterns were found among different world regions. A few countries presented significant inequalities with different directions of association, indicating the diversity of FHH and how complex the meaning and measurement of household headship may be. Further research is warranted to understand context, examine mediating factors, and exploring alternative definitions of household headship in countries with some association.
机译:儿童健康不等式的研究对家庭结构和支柱有限。少数关于男性和女性家庭儿童成果的现有报告产生了不一致的结果。我们的分析的目的是为家庭头部对儿童健康的影响的全球性观点,从多到95毫升横断面调查。学习结果是12-23个月儿童的完全免疫覆盖,并在五岁以下的儿童中脾气暴躁。我们分析了每个国家的最新代表性的国家代表性调查(自2010年),提供了可用数据。在初步探索性分析之后,我们专注于三种类型的家庭:a)男性头部家庭(MHH)包括73.1%的汇集分析中的家庭; b)女性头部家庭(fhh)至少有一个成年男性代表9.8%的家庭;和c)没有成年男性的fhh占15.0%的家庭。我们的分析还包括以下协变量:财富指数,儿童母亲和城乡居住的教育。 Meta-Analytic方法用于计算跨国公司作为参考范畴的国家的汇总效应。关于全免疫,FHH(任何雄性)的汇总患病率为0.99(0.97; 1.01),为FHH(无阳)为0.99(0.97; 1.02)。为了稳定患病率,FHH(任何雄性)的汇总比率为1.00(0.98; 1.02)和FHH(无男性)为1.00(0.98; 1.02)。协变量的调整不会导致结果的任何值得注意的变化。在不同的世界地区中没有发现任何特定的模式。少数国家呈现出具有不同方向的重要不平等,表明家务头舰艇的意义和衡量的多样性以及如何复杂。有权了解进一步的研究,以了解背景,审查介导因素,并在有一些协会的国家/地区探索家庭支柱的替代定义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号