IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v18y2016i3p334-341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposal of indicators to evaluate complementary feeding based on World Health Organization indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Paula Chuproski Saldan
  • Sonia Isoyama Venancio
  • Silvia Regina Dias Medici Saldiva
  • Débora Falleiros de Mello

Abstract

This study compares complementary feeding World Health Organization (WHO) indicators with those built in accordance with Brazilian recommendations (Ten Steps to Healthy Feeding). A cross‐sectional study was carried out during the National Immunization Campaign against Poliomyelitis in Guarapuava‐Paraná, Brazil, in 2012. Feeding data from 1,355 children aged 6–23 months were obtained through the 24 h diet recall. Based on five indicators, the proportion of adequacy was evaluated: introduction of solid, semi‐solid, or soft foods; minimum dietary diversity; meal frequency; acceptable diet; and consumption of iron‐rich foods. Complementary feeding showed adequacy higher than 85% in most WHO indicators, while review by the Ten Steps assessment method showed a less favorable circumstance and a high intake of unhealthy foods. WHO indicators may not reflect the complementary feeding conditions of children in countries with low malnutrition rates and an increased prevalence of overweight/obesity. The use of indicators according to the Ten Steps can be useful to identify problems and redirect actions aimed at promoting complementary feeding.

Suggested Citation

  • Paula Chuproski Saldan & Sonia Isoyama Venancio & Silvia Regina Dias Medici Saldiva & Débora Falleiros de Mello, 2016. "Proposal of indicators to evaluate complementary feeding based on World Health Organization indicators," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 334-341, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:18:y:2016:i:3:p:334-341
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12273
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12273?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:18:y:2016:i:3:p:334-341. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-2018 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.