MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407066259 · doi:10.1186/s41043-025-00770-0

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

2025· review· en· W4407066259 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aysheshim Kassahun Belew, Berhanu Mengistu, Ayenew Molla Lakew, Esmeal Ali Muhammad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Population and Nutrition · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTabooMeta-analysisMedicineEnvironmental healthPregnancySubgroup analysisMEDLINEDemographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Even though maternal nutrition has improved, food taboos and poor dietary practices during pregnancy can still lead to nutrient deficiencies, increasing the risk of complications for both mothers and children. Therefore, this study aimed to generate pooled evidence from across different countries in Sub-Saharan Africa to inform effective prevention actions. This meta-analysis aims to determine the pooled prevalence of food taboo practices and identify associated factors among pregnant women in Sub-Saharan Africa. This study systematically reviewed relevant articles and reports from databases including Embase, MEDLINE, Science Direct, PubMed, Google, and Google Scholar. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale assessed article quality. Data extraction and analysis were done using Excel and STATA 17, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the I 2 statistic, with a random effects model employed for meta-analysis. Publication bias was evaluated and addressed using Duval and Tweedie's Trim and Fill analysis. A total of fifty-eight studies with 20,262 pregnant women were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of food taboo practices reported by the 58 studies was 41% (95% CI: 34, 48%). In the subgroup analysis, the pooled proportion of food taboo practices for studies conducted in urban areas was 40% (95% CI: 32, 48%), while it was 43% (95% CI: 32, 56%) among rural residents. Factors associated with food taboo practices among pregnant women included being unable to read and write (AOR = 2.64%; 95% CI: 1.79–3.90; I 2 = 56.9%), not receiving antenatal care follow-up (AOR = 3.73%; 95% CI: 2.83–3.90; I 2 = 55.1%), and poor maternal nutrition knowledge (AOR = 3.33%; 95% CI: 1.56–7.09; I 2 = 84.3%). According to this review, over two out of every five pregnant mothers practiced food taboos in the region. The educational status of the mother, antenatal care follow-up, and maternal nutrition knowledge were factors affecting food taboo practices among pregnant women. Therefore, emphasis should be given to the uptake of antenatal care follow-up to improve maternal nutrition knowledge and nutritional status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health Population and NutritionSame topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207