MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1111/nhs.12273

Медицинская библиотека · Nursing & health sciences · 2016

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

Saldan Paula Chuproski, Venancio Sonia Isoyama, Saldiva Silvia Regina Dias Medici, de Mello Débora Falleiros

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

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.

Для цитирования: Saldan Paula Chuproski, Venancio Sonia Isoyama, Saldiva Silvia Regina Dias Medici, de Mello Débora Falleiros. Proposal of indicators to evaluate complementary feeding based on World Health Organization indicators.. Nursing & health sciences. 2016. DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12273.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.