Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from IJEqH and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research

Relationship between household wealth inequality and chronic childhood under-nutrition in Bangladesh

Rathavuth Hong1*, James E Banta1 and Jose A Betancourt2

  • * Corresponding author: Rathavuth Hong rhong@gwu.edu

  • † Equal contributors

Author Affiliations

1 George Washington University, School of Public Health and Health Services, 2300 Eye Street N.W. Washington, DC 20037, USA

2 Academy of Health Sciences, U.S. Army Medical Department Center & School, 2250 Stanley Road, Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

International Journal for Equity in Health 2006, 5:15  doi:10.1186/1475-9276-5-15

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.equityhealthj.com/content/5/1/15


Received:23 November 2005
Accepted:5 December 2006
Published:5 December 2006

© 2006 Hong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background

Household food insecurity and under-nutrition remain critically important in developing countries struggling to emerge from the scourge of poverty, where historically, improvements in economic conditions have benefited only certain privileged groups, causing growing inequality in health and healthcare among the population.

Methods

Utilizing information from 5,977 children aged 0-59 months included in the 2004 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey , this study examined the relationship between household wealth inequality and chronic childhood under-nutrition. A child is defined as being chronically undernourished or whose growth rate is adversely stunted, if his or her z-score of height-for-age is more than two standard deviations below the median of international reference. Household wealth status is measured by an established index based on household ownership of durable assets. This study utilized multivariate logistic regressions to estimate the effect of household wealth status on adverse childhood growth rate.

Results

The results indicate that children in the poorest 20% of households are more than three time as likely to suffer from adverse growth rate stunting as children from the wealthiest 20% of households (OR=3.6; 95% CI: 3.0, 4.3). The effect of household wealth status remain significantly large when the analysis was adjusted for a child's multiple birth status, age, gender, antenatal care, delivery assistance, birth order, and duration that the child was breastfed; mother's age at childbirth, nutritional status, education; household access to safe drinking water, arsenic in drinking water, access to a hygienic toilet facility, cooking fuel cleanliness, residence, and geographic location (OR=2.4; 95% CI: 1.8, 3.2).

Conclusion

This study concludes that household wealth inequality is strongly associated with childhood adverse growth rate stunting. Reducing poverty and making services more available and accessible to the poor are essential to improving overall childhood health and nutritional status in Bangladesh.

Background

In spite of remarkable advances in public health during recent decades, many people throughout the developing world remain vulnerable to food insecurity, under-nutrition, and ill health [1]. These problems tend to be particularly severe in developing countries struggling to emerge from the scourge of extreme poverty [2]. In such countries, the health and nutritional benefits spawning from economic growth tend to be concentrated only among the economically-advantaged sectors of the population [3-5].

The Bangladesh economy has improved over the recent past. The country's substantial agricultural sector contributes to 19% of the overall gross domestic product (GDP) and to the significant increase of all exported agriculture products. The industrial sector is rapidly becoming one of the more important components of the Bangladesh economy, contributing 34% to GDP, while the service sector contributing to 47% of GDP. However, despite these economic improvements, the country still struggles to emerge from the clutches of poverty. Almost four in every ten people (36%) live below the absolute poverty line with incomes less than $1 per day. Most reside in rural areas and those living in urban areas lack many basic amenities. A significant proportion of the population does not have sufficient access to food, sanitation facilities, or health care [6,7]. According to the 1998 Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, approximately 2.4 million households (or 24 million people) have an energy intake of less than 1,805 kcal per person per day: an indicator of extreme poverty [8]. Recent improvements in economic conditions are believed to have benefited mainly the wealthier sector of the population more so than the less wealthy sector, with the effect of this widely and seemingly growing economic inequality in health and nutrition still very poorly understood [9]. Bangladesh is similar to many other developing countries: under-nutrition is one of the leading causes of childhood morbidity and mortality. Under-nutrition among children is often caused by the combined effects of improper or insufficient food intake, repeated episodes of infections, and inadequate care during sickness [10]. Additionally, under-nutrition affects somatic growth, impairs the immune system, and increases the risk of infection [11-13]. In developing countries around the world, an estimated 46 million children are malnourished, 127 million are underweight, and 148 million children are adversely growth rate stunted [14]. A recent comparative risk assessment by the World Health Organization estimates under-nutrition is by far the largest contributor to the global burden of disease [15].

Previous research has associated childhood nutrition with a child's multiple-birth status, a mother's education and nutritional status, a father's employment, the mother's breastfeeding and feeding practices, access to safe drinking water and sanitation facilities, access to health care, prevalence of parasitic and infectious diseases, parent's health-seeking behavior, race or ethnicity, rural residence, and social network and family support [16-21]. Demographic characteristics such as a child's age and gender, birth interval (both preceding and succeeding), and the mother's age at childbirth, have also been associated with child nutrition status [22].

According to Kawachi, economic inequality is an independent determinant for childhood under-nutrition [9]. Countries with a greater degree of economic inequality tend to have an overall poorer average population health status than countries with more economic equality [1,23]. Suffice it to say that the relationship between economic inequality and under-nutrition is complex. This is in part due to the fact that greater national wealth does not necessarily translate into better health care for all. If that were the case, then the single best approach to improving health care would be to maximize economic growth [24]. Additionally, economic growth does not always benefit all sections of the society equally. A country's social and economic inequality affects food availability, access to health services, and disease morbidity and mortality among the many sections of a society differently. In Japan, for example, a rapid improvement in life expectancy in the last few decades was associated not only with its rapid economic growth, but also with a low level of economic inequality [25].

A number of studies have illustrated that children from poorer households tend to be more undernourished than children in wealthier households [4,5,26-28]. Social deprivation has also been linked with a child's nutritional status [29]. However, the relationship between economic inequality and a child's nutritional status is not conclusive. A recent study in Mexico discovered that household poverty is not a necessary condition for children to be undernourished [17]. Another recent study in Ecuador found inconsistent evidence to indicate any relationship between economic inequality and the nutritional status of children [9]. Additionally, a study in Cambodia found that acute under-nutrition in children was associated with a mother's feeding practices, parent's health-seeking behavior, and personal hygiene; however, there was no association with household food insecurity [16]. The primary objective of this study is to investigate the association between household wealth inequality and childhood under-nutrition in Bangladesh. We will also examine the effects of other potential risks and confounding factors on childhood under-nutrition.

Methods

The analysis in this study is based on 5,977 children aged 0–59 months with valid information on length or height included in the 2004 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS). Children whose information on length/height was missing (867) or invalid (130) were excluded. The BDHS collected demographic, socioeconomic, and health data from a nationally-representative sample of 11,440 women aged 15–49 (98.6% of eligible women) from 10,500 households (99.8% of eligible households) included in the survey. The study contained 3,513 households from urban areas and 6,987 household from rural areas. The sampling design allowed for national estimates and division-level estimates from the six divisions of all demographic and health indicators collected in the survey. The master sampling frame for the BDHS was based on the 2001 national census. The sampling design was a multistage cluster sample consisting of 361 primary sampling units (PSUs): 122 from urban areas and 239 from rural areas. An average of 30 households was selected per PSU. Details of the sampling design are provided in the main BDHS report [30].

To assess the physical growth and nutritional status of children, the survey measured height or length and weight of all children aged 0–59 months. Details about these measurements are included in the main survey report. The ratio of the height and age of a child serves as a good proxy for chronic under-nutrition among children, and it is not significantly affected by a child's recent episodes of illness. Children with a z-score of height-for-age more than 2 standard deviations below the international referenced median established by the World Health Organization are defined as stunted [31,32].

The BDHS also includes a household wealth status index which is estimated from several household characteristics and asset variables using a principle component analysis [33]. The household characteristics used to estimate the wealth index include having electricity, type of source of drinking water, access to a sanitation facility, availability of cooking fuel, main roof material, main wall material, floor material. The asset variables include durable goods (wardrobe, table, chair or bench, watch or clock, radio, television, bicycle, motorcycle, sewing machine, and telephone) and land ownership [30]. This household wealth index is used as a proxy indicator for household wealth status in this analysis. Household wealth inequality is measured by dividing the wealth index into quintiles, with the lowest quintile representing the poorest 20% of households and the highest quintile representing the wealthiest 20% of households in Bangladesh.

The analysis conducted in this study adjusts for the effects of potentially confounding factors due to the fact that household wealth status is correlated with maternal nutrition and other socioeconomic and demographic factors that can also affect the nutritional status of children [34,35]. These potentially confounding factors include children of multiple-births (single-born, twin or higher order), a child's age (0–11, 12–23, 24–35, 36–47, 48–59 months), child's gender (boy, girl), birth order (1, 2, 3, 4+), mother's access to antenatal care (no, yes), availability of professional assistance at delivery (no, yes), duration of breastfeeding (never breastfed, 0–11, 12–17, 18–23, ≥ 24 months); mother's age at childbirth (15–24, 25–34, 35–49 years), mother's body mass index (BMI) (18.5–24.9, < 18.5, ≥ 25.0 kg/m2), mother's education (no education, primary or less, secondary or higher); household access to safe drinking water (no, yes), presence of arsenic in drinking water (≤ 50, > 50 parts per billion), access to a toilet facility (no, yes), cleanliness of cooking fuel (not highly polluted, highly polluted) residence (urban, rural), and geographic location (Barisal, Chittagong, Dhaka, Khulna, Rajshahi, Sylhet). For further details on the variable definitions, please see Table 1.

Table 1. Sample distribution and prevalence of stunting among children age 0–59 months by household wealth status and other selected characteristics, Bangladesh 2004

The effects of household wealth status and other factors on a child's growth-stunting were estimated using multivariate logistic regression methods using the analytical software package STATA [36]. We also analyzed alternative regression models separately for boys and girls, and for urban and rural to assess the relative significance of different confounding factors among these groups. In our analysis, we assigned assorted weights to restore the representativeness of the sample, adjusting for non-response bias and over-sampling in certain categories of respondents such as among those respondents living in the rural areas [30]. The results are presented as percent of stunting and significant level (p-value) in bivariate analysis and odds-ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) logistic regression analysis.

Results

Twenty-five percent of children aged 0–59 months in Bangladesh live in the poorest 20% of households while 17% live in the wealthiest 20% of households (Table 1). Slightly more than one percent of Bangladeshi children were born of multiple-births. Children are almost equally distributed by age and gender. Thirty-nine percent of Bangladeshi children have mothers who received antenatal care during their pregnancy and 13% of them were delivered by a health professional. Twenty-nine percent of children are first-order births while another 27% are fourth-order births or higher. Almost all Bangladeshi children are breastfed with more than three-quarters (77%) being breastfed for one year or longer. The majority (63%) of all children were born to mothers aged 15–24. Fifty-seven percent of children sampled have mothers with a normal body weight while 37% of mothers are underweight and 5% are overweight. Approximately one-third (37%) of mothers have no education with 31% having a primary education and secondary or more education respectively. About nine in every ten children live in households with safe sources of drinking water (piped or tube-well), 9% live in a household where the source of drinking water contains arsenic (> 50 parts per billion), 57% live in a household with access to a toilet facility, and 85% live in households using highly-polluted cooking fuels. About one in every five children lives in urban areas. By geographic division, 31% of Bangladeshi children live in the Dhaka division, 22% in the Chittagon and Rajshahi divisions respectively, and 11% in the Khulna division. Only 6% of the children live in the Barisal division with another 8% living in the Sylhet division.

Overall, 43% of Bangladeshi children aged 0–59 months are adversely growth-rate stunted (Table 1). This figure represents one of the highest rates of chronic childhood under-nutrition in the South Asian region and in fact, in the world [8]. The prevalence of childhood growth-stunting declines as the household wealth status increases, from 54% in the poorest households (lowest wealth index quintile) to 25% in the wealthiest households (highest wealth index quintile). This prevalence of childhood growth-stunting is higher among multiple-birth children and increases with a child's age. The prevalence is considerably less common during the first 12 months of life when most babies are fully breastfed than at older ages. The prevalence rapidly increases from 12–23 months of age, after which it levels off with a slight fluctuation. The prevalence of childhood growth-stunting does not vary much by a child's gender. It is higher however, among children whose mother did not receive antenatal care and delivered without professional assistance. The prevalence is somewhat higher among children of fourth-order births or higher.

Among children who were breastfed, the prevalence of growth-stunting increases if a child is breastfed for longer than 11 months (48%–56%). The prevalence of growth-stunting is also higher among children who were never breastfed (55%). Additionally, children of older mothers are more likely to suffer from growth-stunting than those whose mothers are in a younger age group. Also the prevalence of adverse growth-stunting is strongly negatively associated with a mother's BMI and educational status.

Children from households without access to a toilet facility are more likely to suffer from growth-stunting (50%) than in households with access to a toilet facility (38%). Additionally, children in households where highly-polluted cooking fuels are used are more likely to suffer from growth-stunting than in households where clean cooking fuels are used. However, the results indicate that the availability of safe drinking water and the presence of arsenic in drinking water are not associated with the prevalence of growth-stunting. The prevalence of growth-stunting is lower in urban areas (38%) than in rural areas (44%), and is much lower in Khulna division (32%) than other divisions of Bangladesh (40–49%).

Effects of wealth status on growth-stunting

The unadjusted odds of suffering from growth-stunting are 3.6 times higher among children living in the poorest (lowest wealth index quintile) households than among children in the wealthiest (highest wealth index quintile) households (OR = 3.6; 95% CI: 3.0, 4.3) (Table 2, Model 1). The odds of suffering from childhood growth-stunting declines consistently as wealth index increases. This relationship remains strong even when controlling for a child's multiple birth-status, age, gender, antenatal care, type of delivery, birth order, and duration of breastfeeding. In Model 2, when these childhood characteristics are controlled for, the odds of a child suffering from growth-stunting are 2.7 times higher among the poorest 20% of households than in the wealthiest 20% of households. Additionally, controlling for a mother's characteristics such as age at childbirth, BMI, and education slightly reduces the effect of wealth status. In the full model (Model 4), when we control for child's and mother's characteristics and the availability of safe drinking water, arsenic in drinking water, access to toilet facility, clean cooking fuel, urban/rural residence, and geographic division, the effect of household wealth status on childhood growth-stunting remains large and highly, statistically significant (OR = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.8, 3.2).

Table 2. Effects of household wealth status and other selected characteristics on stunting among children age 0–59 months, Bangladesh 2004

Effects of other risk factors and confounders

Among the controlled variables, a child's age and multiple-birth status have the strongest effects on the risk of a child suffering from growth-stunting. Additionally, this effect is independent of the household wealth status and other maternal and household characteristics (Table 2). When we control for household wealth status and other factors such as antenatal care, delivery type, mother's age at childbirth, mother's BMI, and residence, we find all have statistically significant effects, but these effects are generally small. The adjusted prevalence of adverse growth-stunting is significantly lower in the Khulna and Rajshahi divisions than in any other division (Table 2). We also carried out the above multivariate analysis separately for boys and girls, for urban and rural areas, and for children whose mothers had no education, a primary education or less, and a secondary education or higher. We found that household wealth status has a strong negative effect on childhood adverse growth-stunting in each case (results not shown).

Discussion

The effects of poverty on a child's nutritional status is a manifestation of physical developmental patterns of children who live in poorer conditions with insufficient food intake, have a higher risk to infection, and who lack access to basic health care [37]. Results of this study illustrate that chronic childhood under-nutrition is a critical problem in Bangladesh, and that children in less wealthy households are at a much greater risk of being undernourished than children in wealthier households. Children in the poorest 20% of households are at more than twice the risk of suffering from adverse childhood growth-stunting than children in the wealthiest 20% of households. This is independent of a child's birth status, age, mother's education and nutritional status, household access to clean water and sanitation, and other important factors. The results hold separately by the gender of a child and by the urban/rural residence of a child. These findings are consistent with the results from previous research in other developing countries [27,28], and provide further evidence that wealth inequality is an important risk factor for chronic childhood under-nutrition.

The lack of a gender differential in adverse growth-stunting in our study indicates that there is no intra-household gender bias in feeding and health care for children in Bangladesh. An increasing pattern in many developing countries of growth-stunting by age is consistent with the typical pattern of increasing prevalence of childhood diseases by age such as diarrhea and acute respiratory infections. [40]. This may partly be due to the beginning of feeding solid foods to a child around 6 months of age, which increases the likelihood of consuming contaminated foods and removes the inherent protection provided by breast milk. Additionally, children begin crawling around this age and are more likely to be carried outdoors, which exposes them to additional infections. Consistent with past research, children of multiple- birth status are more likely to be undernourished than children who are single-births [21]. The association between adverse growth-stunting and higher-order births may be due to competition for food within a household that is likely to be greater in households with more children. In addition, there is a higher proportion of adverse growth-stunting among children who were breastfed for more than one year partly due to the fact that poorer mothers are more likely to continue breastfeeding as a substitute for supplemental feeding. Contrary to the expectation, our analysis finds no significant effects of breastfeeding duration and household water and sanitation conditions on childhood adverse growth-stunting.

In previous research, it has been suggested that a mother's education is one of the more important factors in promoting a family's health and nutrition, increasing household income [39,40]. However, in our analysis, maternal education is found to have little to no effect on adverse childhood growth-stunting; even when we control for a mother's education, this does not significantly alter the effect of household wealth status on growth-stunting. This may be partly due to the majority (69%) of mothers in Bangladesh having a primary education, less than primary education, or no formal education at all.

One potential limitation of this analysis is that it does not control for diet and other health care indicators. However, household wealth status functions mainly through better access to food and health care in affecting childhood nutritional status, for example more wealthy households can afford better food in terms of quality. In the case of adults, the association between nutritional status and household wealth status could be bi-directional and have a reverse-causal relationship. In fact, household wealth status can affect access to food and health care, but undernourished adults whose ability to work is limited will in turn affect the household economic status of the household. In this case, our inability to control for food intake and access to health care is not a major limitation.

Another potential limitation is the cross-sectional design of our analysis. However, due to the fact that the relationship operates basically from household wealth status to childhood growth-stunting, the effects estimated in this study are a good measure of the causal relationship between household wealth status and childhood chronic under-nutrition. Moreover, the study can be criticized for using an indirect measure of household wealth. However, due to the fact that in developing countries like Bangladesh it is hard to obtain reliable income and expenditure data, an asset-based index is generally considered a good proxy for household wealth status. Notwithstanding these limitations, there is evidence of a relationship between household wealth status and others factors and childhood growth-stunting which suggests that improving the health and nutritional status of children in Bangladesh can be realized through expanding and integrating community health and nutritional programs and initiatives targeting the poor. These programs include but are not limited to the Bangladesh Integrated Nutritional Program (BINP) and Program for Bangladesh Poverty Reduction (PBPR).

Competing interests

The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

RH carried out the study design, data management and analysis, and drafted and revised the manuscript. JEB participated in the designing of the study, and in drafting and revising the manuscript. JAB participated in the designing of the study, in managing of the data, and in drafting and revising the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

References

  1. World Bank: World Development Report 2000. Washington DC: World Bank; 2000. OpenURL

  2. United Nations System, Standing Committee on Nutrition: 5 ft report on the world nutrition situation: Nutrition for improved development outcomes. New York: United Nations; 2004. OpenURL

  3. Auerbach JA, Krimgold BK: Scientific Research on Socioeconomic status and health: Domestic and international evidence "Improving Health: It doesn't take a revolution". In Income, socioeconomic status and health: Exploring the relation. Edited by Auerbach JA, Krimgold BK. Washington DC: National Policy Association; 2001:1-11. OpenURL

  4. Zere E, McIntyre D: Inequities in under-five child malnutrition in South Africa.

    Int J Equity Health 2003, 2:7. PubMed Abstract | BioMed Central Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  5. Thang NM, Popkin BM: In an era of economic growth, is inequity holding back reduction in child malnutrition in Vietnam?

    Asian Pa J Clin Nutr 2003, 12:405-10. OpenURL

  6. Asian Development Bank, Japan International Cooperation Agency: Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction in Bangladesh 2004. Dhaka: ADB, JICA; 2004. OpenURL

  7. United Nations Development Program: Human development report 2005. New York: UNDP; 2005. OpenURL

  8. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistic: Household Expenditure Survey 1995–1996. Dhaka: BBS; 1998. OpenURL

  9. Larrea C, Kawachi I: Does economic inequality affect child malnutrition? The case of Ecuador.

    Soc Sci Med 2005, 60:165-78. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  10. Pelletier DL: The relationship between child anthropometry and mortality in developing countries: Implication for policy, program and future research.

    J Nutr 1994, (Suppl 124):2047S-81S. OpenURL

  11. Rice AL, Sacco L, Hyder A, Black RE: Malnutrition as an underlying cause of childhood deaths associated with infectious diseases in developing countries.

    Bull World Health Organ 2000, 78:1207-21. PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  12. Pelletier DL: Malnutrition, morbidity and child mortality in developing countries. In Too young to die: Genes or gender?. United Nations. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, United Nations; 1998:109-32. OpenURL

  13. McFarlane H: Malnutrition and impaired immune response to infection.

    Proc Nutr Soc 1976, 35:263-72. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  14. United Nations System, Standing Committee on Nutrition: 5 ft report on the world nutrition situation: Nutrition for improved development outcomes. New York: United Nations; 2004. OpenURL

  15. World Health Organization: World Health Report 2002. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002. OpenURL

  16. Jacobs B, Robert E: Baseline assessment for addressing acute malnutrition by public health staff in Cambodia.

    J Health Pop Nutr 2004, 22:212-9. OpenURL

  17. Reyes H, Perez-Cuevas R, Sandoval A, Castillo R, Santos JI, Doubova S, Gutierrez G: The family as a determinant of stunting in children living in conditions of extreme poverty: a case-control study.

    BMC Public Health 2004, 4:57. PubMed Abstract | BioMed Central Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  18. Frongillo EA, Onis M, Hanson KMP: Socioeconomic and demographic factors are associated with worldwide pattern of stunting and wasting of children.

    J Nutr 1997, 127:2302-9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  19. Gopalan C: Current food and nutrition situation in south Asian and south-east Asian countries.

    Biomed Environ Sci 1996, 9:102-16. PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  20. Esrey JP, Habicht JP, Latham MC: Drinking water source, diarrheal morbidity, and child growth in villages with both traditional and improved water supplies in rural Lesotho, Southern Africa.

    Am J Public Health 1988, 78:1451-5. PubMed Abstract | PubMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  21. Jaffar S, Jepson A, Leach A, Greenwood A, Whittle H, Greenwood B: Causes of mortality in twins in a rural region of The Gambia, West Africa.

    Ann Trop Paediatr 1998, 18:231-8. PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  22. Vella VA, Tomkins J, Marshall T: Determinants of child mortality in south-west Uganda.

    J Biosoc Sci 1992, 24:103-12. PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  23. Ross NA, Wolfson MC, Dunn JR, Berthelot J, Kaplan GA, Lynch JW: Relation between income inequality and mortality in Canada and in the United States: cross sectional assessment using census data and vital statistics.

    BMJ 2000, 320:898-902. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  24. Wilkinson RG: Putting the picture together: prosperity, redistribution, health, and welfare. In Social determinants of health. Edited by Marmot MG, Wilkinson RG. New York: Oxford University Press; 1999:256-74. OpenURL

  25. Hertzman C, Frank J, Evans RG: Heterogeneities in health status and the determinants of population health. In Why are some people healthy and others not. The determinants of health of the populations. Edited by Evans RG, Barer ML, Marmor TR. New York: Aldine de Gruyter; 1994:67-92. OpenURL

  26. Larrea C, Freire W: Social inequality and child malnutrition in four Aden countries.

    Rev Panam Salud Publica 2002, 11:356-64. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  27. Wang Y, Monteiro C, Popkin BM: Trend of obesity and underweight in older children and adolescence in the United States, Brazil, China, and Russia.

    Am J Clin Nutr 2002, 75:971-7. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  28. Doak C, Adair L, Bentley M, Fengying Z, Popkin B: The underweight/overweight household: an exploration of household sociodemographic and dietary factors in China.

    Public Health Nutr 2002, 5:215-21. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  29. Armstrong J, Dorosty AR, Reilly JJ, Emmett PM: Coexistence of social inequalities in undernutrition and obesity in preschool children: population based cross sectional study.

    Achieves Diseases of Childhood 2003, 88:671-5. Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  30. National Institute of Population Research and Training, Mitra and Associates, ORC Macro: The Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2004. Dhaka, Bangladesh; Calverton Maryland: National Institute of Population Research and Training, Mitra and Associates, ORC Macro; 2001. OpenURL

  31. Dibley MJ, Goldsby JB, Staehling NW, Trowbridge FL: Development of normalized curves for the international growth reference: Historical and technical considerations.

    Am J Clin Nutr 1987, 46:736-748. PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  32. Dibley MJ, Staehling NW, Neiburg P, Trowbridge FL: Interpretation of z-score anthropometric indicators derived from the international growth reference.

    Am J Clin Nutr 1987, 46:749-762. PubMed Abstract OpenURL

  33. Rutstein SO, Johnson K: DHS Comparative Report No. 6: The DHS wealth index. Calverton MD: ORC Macro; 2004. OpenURL

  34. Acheson D, Barker D, Chambers J, Graham H, Marmot M, Whitehead M: Independent inquiry into inequalities in health. London: Stationary Office, Report to the Secretary of State for Health; 1998. OpenURL

  35. Berkman LK, Kawachi I: Social Epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000. OpenURL

  36. Stata Corporation, Inc: STATA Release 8.1. College Station Texas: Stata Press; 2003. OpenURL

  37. Food and Agriculture Organization: Chronic undernutrition among children: An indicator of poverty. [http://www.fao.org/sd/dim_en3/en3_040101_en.htm] webcite

  38. Mishra V: Indoor air pollution from biomass combustion and acute respiratory illness in preschool age children in Zimbabwe.

    Int J Epidemiol 2003, 32:847-853. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  39. Peña R, Wall S, Persson L: The effect of poverty, social inequality, and maternal education on infant mortality in Nicaragua, 1988–1993.

    Am J Public Health 2000, 90:64-9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text OpenURL

  40. Casa JA, Dachs N, Bambas A: Health disparities in Latin America and the Caribbean: The role of social and economic determinants. In Equity and health. Washington DC: Pan American Health Organization; 2001:22-49. OpenURL