Anemia Prevalence and Anthropometric Status of Indigenous Women and Young Children in Rural Botswana: The San People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Botswana, there is limited data available on the health and nutritional status of the San People (also known as the Basarwa or Bushmen), an Indigenous minority group primarily living in the Ghanzi District. Our aim in this study was to assess anemia prevalence among and anthropometric indices of women and young children in Ghanzi District through a cross-sectional survey. We recruited 367 mother–child pairs (women 15–49 years and children 6–59 months) in nine randomly selected areas. A capillary blood sample was collected, and weight and height were measured. Hemoglobin (Hb) concentration was measured with use of a hemoglobinometer (HemoCue, AB), as per global recommendations. Overall, adjusted anemia prevalence was 12% in non-pregnant women (Hb < 120 g/L), 26% in pregnant women (Hb < 110 g/L), and 42% in children (Hb < 110 g/L), but it varied widely depending on whether or not the controversial factor of ethnicity was adjusted for (range of 6–26%, 22–30%, and 35–68% prevalence, respectively). Thirty-nine percent (n = 133/344) of non-pregnant women and 52% (n = 12/23) of pregnant women were underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m2). In children aged 6–23 months, 41% were underweight (weight-for-age z-score < −2 SD), 13% were wasted (weight-for-height z-score < −2 SD), and 65% were stunted (height-for-age z-score < −2 SD); in children aged 24–59 months, 57% were underweight, 13% were wasted, and 66% were stunted. Fifty-six percent (n = 205/367) of women self-reported smoking in any form (rolled cigarettes or snuffing). The high prevalence of smoking among women, underweight status among pregnant women, and anemia, stunting, and wasting among children is of the highest concern for public health and should be addressed in future health and nutrition programming.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".