Multiple micronutrients fortified salt: consumers’ acceptability survey, Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Food fortification with micronutrients is an insufficiently used technology in developing countries. Salt is consumed in small, constant daily amounts by most people globally. Salt has been instrumental in delivering iodine to a wide population globally through fortification. There is a proven effective technology for fortifying iodinated salt with iron, folate, and Vitamin B12. Findings have shown that both Double (Iodine and iron) fortified salt (DFS) and quadruple (iron, iodine, folate, and vitamin B12) fortified salt (QFS) are effective in raising hemoglobin levels. AIM: To assess the acceptability and gauge consumers' willingness to use double-fortified and quadruple-fortified salt formulations. METHODS: We conducted an observational study involving 300 households at Haydom Lutheran Hospital catchment area in Northern rural Tanzania between October 2021 and April 2022. Each household was supplied with one type of salt (iodized salt (IS), DFS or QFS) for cooking common family dishes for one week. Thereafter, at least two adult members of the family who used the dishes cooked with study salt were interviewed using the adopted 5-point Hedonic scale. RESULTS: A total of 899 individuals were interviewed after using study salt for one week: 286 IS, 305 DFS, and 308 QFS. The overall acceptability for the salts was QFS (82%), DFS (78%), and IS (79%). The mean sensory (taste, color and appearance) scores of the QFS (1.7) and DFS (1.7) were comparable to standard iodized salt (1.6). CONCLUSION: Quadruple-fortified salt and double-fortified salt are equally acceptable and have similar sensory scores as standard iodized salt when used to cook commonly eaten dishes in the study population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".