In Ethiopia, India, and Peru, Household Expenditures on Fats Are More Strongly Associated with Children’s Future Heights Than Expenditures on Other Food Groups (P10-006-19)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesized that household food expenditures on 7 key dietary food groups—starches, fruits & vegetables, legumes, eggs, dairy, meat and fat—woul differentially affect future child height-for-age z scores (HAZ), after adjusting for household, parental and community characteristics. We investigated the associations of household food group expenditures at 5 years (y) and 8y with child HAZ at 8y and 12y, respectively. We used data from 6993 children, born around 2001, from Ethiopia, India, Peru and Vietnam, collected at ages 5, 8, and 12y from the Young Lives younger cohort. We compared associations between two weeks of household food expenditures (in Purchasing Power Parity adjusted dollars (PPP$) to allow meaningful cross-country comparisons) on food groups and child HAZ at subsequent rounds of collection to assess longitudinal relations. Total food expenditures, rural/urban residence, maternal and paternal education, and child sex were controlled for in our models. In Ethiopia, results pointed to total food expenditure as one of the critical and significant components associated with subsequent child HAZ; and among the food groups, expenditures on fats had the largest associations with future child HAZ. In India and Peru, expenditure on one specific food group—fats—seemed to be the most important significant predictor of future HAZ in children from among food expenditures. In Vietnam, starches were a significant negative predictor of future HAZ, which may relate to the significance of dietary diversity and prediction of future HAZ for this country’s cohort. Our results pinpoint specific facets of the diet that may have had the greatest impact on child growth for each country. They also point to the importance of examining country-level context, and caution about generalizing from one context to others. These results, moreover, highlight the usefulness of household food expenditure survey data in analyzing children’s nutrition at the country level, and may help to influence child food and nutrition policies in these four unique countries. This study is based on research funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Eunice Shriver Kennedy National Institute of Child Health and Development and Grand Challenges Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".