Gender Differences in Nutritional Status of Children in Tea Gardens of Darjeeling: Based on Conventional Indices and Composite Index of Anthropometric Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The study aims to assess the nutritional status of children aged 1-5 years and its relationship with gender. Further, it also tries to assess the nutritional status of children using conventional indices and the composite index of anthropometric failure (CIAF) and suggests the appropriate method to estimate undernutrition among children. Materials and Methods: The area selected for the study is the tea gardens of Darjeeling. The study is based on the primary survey, and a total of 400 children were included in the study. A Chi-square test is conducted to find out the differences in the nutritional status of children gender-wise. Results: The analysis indicated that the level of undernutrition in tea gardens of Darjeeling is very high (51%). The level of undernutrition estimated through conventional indices indicated that the level of stunting, wasting, and underweight are 43.8%, 20.2%, and 36.2%, respectively, whereas the composite index of anthropometric failure estimated more prevalence rate (51.2%). The analysis indicates that the conventional indices underestimate the prevalence of undernutrition. On the contrary, a composite index of anthropometric failure (CIAF) gives better estimates of undernutrition. Both the indices of nutrition in the study area indicated higher undernutrition among girl children than a boy. However, no significant differences in the nutritional status gender-wise exist. Conclusion: The result depicts the positive sign as it contradicts the general belief that a boy child is more nourished than a girl. However, half of the children in tea gardens of Darjeeling aged 1-5 years, irrespective of gender, are undernourished. The paper highlights the urgent need to work out nutritional strategies to improve child health in the study area.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".