Home » DHS-8 Questionnaire Review - Archived » Core questionnaire: Nutrition » Assessment of Child Growth
| Re: Assessment of Child Growth [message #17134 is a reply to message #16775] |
Fri, 15 March 2019 14:43   |
jruelbergeron
Messages: 8
Registered: March 2019
|
Member |
|
|
The Global Financing Facility (GFF) Secretariat supports the proposal put forth by DataDENT.
The GFF Secretariat feels strongly that data on growth monitoring and promotion coverage should be included in the new DHS 8 questionnaires. The GFF Secretariat further argues that data on the coverage not only of growth monitoring but also of growth promotion that is tied to growth monitoring activities should be collected. This could be done through the addition of questions in either one of two categories of proposed sub-questions put forth by DataDENT. The first is through an addition to this proposal on child growth assessment (labeled #6, this thread), which would ask about whether the mother received counseling on IYCF based on the child's weight and/or length measurement (if she says yes to either of the preceding questions on weight/height measurement). The second option would be to include the source of information from which counseling on IYCF was received, building on DataDENT's proposal on IYCF counseling 6-23 months questions (labeled as #5, see comment there). Both of these recommendations are tied to the need to better understand how much growth promotion is being done as part of national growth monitoring and promotion programs/activities.
Evidence has demonstrated that growth monitoring as a stand-alone intervention produces little to no effect on child nutrition outcomes (Mangasaryan et al., 2011; Bhutta et al., 2008; Garner et al., 2000). Thus, its use is not recommended without adequate nutrition counselling and referrals (Bhutta et al., 2008). Without data on the extent to which growth monitoring is accompanied by promotion as it is meant to be by design, however, policy makers and program planners are limited in the degree to which they can inform program improvement decisions. As stated in DataDENT's proposal, 61% of the 167 member states who responded to the WHO 2016-17 Global Nutrition Policy review are implementing GMP, making it the second most widely implemented nutrition intervention globally. Moreover, over half of countries report that GMP happens monthly, representing an important opportunity to seize data on its coverage and functioning to stimulate appropriate, data-informed action.
References:
Ashworth A, Shrimpton R, Jamil K. Growth monitoring and promotion: review of evidence of impact. Maternal & child nutrition. 2008 Apr;4:86-117.
Bhutta ZA, Ahmed T, Black RE, et al. Maternal and Child Undernutrition 3 What works ? Interventions for maternal and child undernutrition and survival. 2008;371.
Garner P, Panpanich R, Logan S. Is routine growth monitoring effective? A systematic review of trials. Arch Dis Child 2000;82(3):197201.
Mangasaryan N, Arabi M, Schultink W. Revisiting the concept of growth monitoring and its possible role in community-based nutrition programs. Food Nutr Bull 2011;32(1):4253.
|
|
|
|
Current Time: Fri Apr 26 07:38:07 Coordinated Universal Time 2024
|
The DHS Program User Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
