» Articles » PMID: 38845052

Effect of Social and Behavioral Change Interventions on Minimum Dietary Diversity Among Pregnant Women and Associated Socio-economic Inequality in Rajasthan, India

Overview
Journal BMC Nutr
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2024 Jun 6
PMID 38845052
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Maternal dietary diversity is a key to improving the birth and child health outcomes. Besides socio-economic factors, the nutrition specific program- Social and Behavioural Change Communication (SBCC) interventions aimed to improve maternal dietary diversity has varied levels of impact on the socio-economic groups in poor resource setups.

Objective: To measure the factors associated with the minimum dietary diversity (MDD) among pregnant women in selected districts of Rajasthan with special emphasis on the SBCC components. Additionally, it measures the socio-economic gaps in the behaviour of consumption of diversified diet during pregnancy.

Methods: Data from a cross sectional survey of 6848 pregnant women, who have received a continuous SBCC counselling and registered under a state introduced conditional cash transfer program, during May to June, 2023, in five intervention districts -Banswara, Baran, Dunagrpur, Pratapgarh and Udaipur in Rajasthan was used. A 24 h recall based food consumption behaviour has been gathered to measure the MDD of pregnant women. Study has used descriptive statistics, multivariate regressions, and multivariate decomposition analysis to address the research objectives.

Results: Study finds that only 55.2% of pregnant women are consuming diverse diet in the study duration with mean dietary diversity score is 4.8 (+/- 1.5). Logistic regression finds that SBCC components such as frontline workers (aOR = 1.3, CI: 1.1-1.4), community motivators (aOR = 1.9, CI: 1.7-2.1), and participation in MCHND (aOR = 1.0, CI: 0.9-1.2) have significant and higher likelihood on consumption of MDD food on previous day. A higher education and belonging from richer wealth quintile also show higher association for consumption of MDD. Multivariate decomposition shows, among richest and poorest wealth categories there is 19% point difference (58% difference due to coefficient vs. 42% difference due to composition) in MDD consumption. This is positively contributed by the caste and educational categories of women.

Conclusion: Despite a predominant vegetarian diet consuming population, better maternal dietary diversity was observed among those exposed to higher dose of SBCC intervention package. Educational status and caste of the respondent were significantly associated with minimum dietary diversity and contributed to the socio-economic inequality highlighting the importance of tailored and sustained SBCC interventions.

Citing Articles

Food taboo practices and associated factors among pregnant women in Sub-Sahara Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Belew A, Mengistu B, Lakew A, Muhammad E J Health Popul Nutr. 2025; 44(1):24.

PMID: 39893470 PMC: 11786486. DOI: 10.1186/s41043-025-00770-0.

References
1.
Sharma S, Akhtar F, Singh R, Mehra S . Dietary Intake across Reproductive Life Stages of Women in India: A Cross-Sectional Survey from 4 Districts of India. J Nutr Metab. 2020; 2020:9549214. PMC: 7341409. DOI: 10.1155/2020/9549214. View

2.
Gupta S, Sunder N, Pingali P . Are Women in Rural India Really Consuming a Less Diverse Diet?. Food Nutr Bull. 2020; 41(3):318-331. PMC: 7675769. DOI: 10.1177/0379572120943780. View

3.
Nguyen P, Kachwaha S, Avula R, Young M, Tran L, Ghosh S . Maternal nutrition practices in Uttar Pradesh, India: Role of key influential demand and supply factors. Matern Child Nutr. 2019; 15(4):e12839. PMC: 6852235. DOI: 10.1111/mcn.12839. View

4.
. Subnational mapping of under-5 and neonatal mortality trends in India: the Global Burden of Disease Study 2000-17. Lancet. 2020; 395(10237):1640-1658. PMC: 7262604. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30471-2. View

5.
Mukhopadhyay S, Sarkar A . Pregnancy-related food habits among women of rural Sikkim, India. Public Health Nutr. 2009; 12(12):2317-22. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980009005576. View