Inequalities in large‐scale breastfeeding programmes in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso and Vietnam

Author:

Sanghvi Tina G.1,Godha Deepali2,Frongillo Edward A.3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Alive & Thrive initiative, FHI 360, Family Health International, Washington DC and Durham North Carolina USA

2. Consultant FHI 360, 406 Ghanshyam Castle, Khajrana Square Indore Madhya Pradesh India

3. Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behaviour University of South Carolina Columbia South Carolina USA

Abstract

AbstractInequalities in breastfeeding programmes and practices have slowed global progress in providing the life‐saving protection of breastfeeding for millions of infants despite well‐known life‐long impacts. As breastfeeding interventions are scaled up, inequalities in coverage and breastfeeding practices should be tracked, particularly in disadvantaged groups, who are likely to suffer the most serious health and developmental impacts of poor childhood nutrition. The literature provides evidence of inequalities in breastfeeding practices, but research is limited on socioeconomic disparities in the coverage of breastfeeding interventions. This paper (1) compares inequalities in breastfeeding practices in intervention and nonintervention areas and (2) documents inequalities in programme coverage by type of intervention. We disaggregated endline evaluation surveys in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso and Vietnam, where rigorous evaluations had documented significant overall improvements, and analysed whether inequalities in breastfeeding practices and programme coverage differed by treatment areas. We used Erreygers index to quantify inequalities and found that breastfeeding practices were largely pro‐poor; intervention coverage was not consistently pro‐poor. While counselling coverage often favoured women from the poorest quintile, public education/media coverage consistently favoured better‐off women. Inequalities favoured more educated mothers in the coverage of combined interventions. None of the programmes had explicit equality objectives. The results indicate the need for introducing specific actions to reduce inequalities in breastfeeding policies and programmes. This is a priority unfinished agenda for nutrition programming.

Funder

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3