Social inequality and children’s health in Africa: A cross sectional study

listen audio

Study Justification:
This study aims to examine the socioeconomic inequality in children’s health in Africa and identify factors that moderate this inequality. By analyzing data from Demographic and Health Surveys conducted between 2003 and 2012 in 26 African countries, the study provides valuable insights into the impact of social determinants on child health outcomes. The study is justified by the need to address social disparities in health outcomes and identify potential policy changes to reduce social inequality.
Highlights:
– The study analyzes data from 26 African countries collected between 2003 and 2012.
– Socioeconomic measures include household wealth, maternal education, and urban/rural area of residence.
– Moderating factors include reproductive behavior, access to health care, time, economic development, health expenditures, and foreign aid.
– Birth spacing, skilled birth attendants, economic development, and greater per capita health expenditures benefit children of disadvantaged mothers.
– The wealthy benefit more from skilled birth attendants and higher per capita health expenditures.
– Some health behavior and policy changes can reduce social inequality, but the wealthy benefit more than the poor from provision of health services.
Recommendations:
– Implement policies that promote birth spacing and access to skilled birth attendants, particularly for disadvantaged mothers.
– Increase economic development and per capita health expenditures to benefit children of disadvantaged mothers.
– Ensure that health services are accessible and affordable for all socioeconomic groups.
– Consider redistributive policies to reduce the disparity in health outcomes between the wealthy and the poor.
Key Role Players:
– Government agencies responsible for health and social welfare policies.
– Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the field of child health and social inequality.
– International organizations providing foreign aid and technical assistance.
– Health professionals and researchers specializing in child health and social determinants of health.
– Community leaders and advocates for social justice and equity.
Cost Items for Planning Recommendations:
– Funding for programs promoting birth spacing and access to skilled birth attendants.
– Investment in economic development initiatives to improve living conditions and household wealth.
– Increased budget allocation for health expenditures, particularly in disadvantaged areas.
– Resources for training and capacity building of healthcare providers.
– Funding for research and evaluation of the impact of policy changes on social inequality in children’s health.
Please note that the cost items provided are general categories and not actual cost estimates. The actual cost will depend on the specific context and implementation strategies.

Background: This study examines socioeconomic inequality in children’s health and factors that moderate this inequality. Socioeconomic measures include household wealth, maternal education and urban/rural area of residence. Moderating factors include reproductive behavior, access to health care, time, economic development, health expenditures and foreign aid. Methods: Data are taken from Demographic and Health Surveys conducted between 2003 and 2012 in 26 African countries. Results: Birth spacing, skilled birth attendants, economic development and greater per capita health expenditures benefit the children of disadvantaged mothers, but the wealthy benefit more from the services of a skilled birth attendant and from higher per capita expenditure on health. Conclusion: Some health behavior and policy changeswould reduce social inequality, but the wealthy benefit more than the poor from provision of health services.

The Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) for Africa are the primary source of data for the analysis (http://www.measuredhs.com). Data collected since 2003 from 26 countries are analyzed to examine the impact of social determinants on child health. We focus on this time period because some of the measures in DHS are comparable for this period (the wealth index and a more detailed measure of maternal education.) Using this time period also allows for the assessment of change, as more attention has been given to social disparities in health outcomes. Several countries have multiple surveys. DHS surveys are co-sponsored by USAID, the governments of the countries where the surveys are conducted, and several other foundations. Surveys are based on national probability sampling so that results can be generalized to the country level. Trained interviewers visit selected households and conduct interviews with men and women of reproductive age. Interviewers also prepare a household roster with basic information for all members of the household. These surveys have become widely accepted sources of information for a variety of health related topics. The key child health outcomes of interest are neonatal mortality (coded 0 or 1), the hazard rate of child survival until age five, and nutritional status as indicated by height-for-age Z-score multiplied by 100 to facilitate reporting of significant digits (HAZ). Measures of social status include maternal education treated as a interval level variable (no education, incomplete primary, complete primary, incomplete secondary, complete secondary, and post-secondary), wealth, a reflection of the household standard of living, as measured by household assets such as appliances and home building material sanitation facilities and housing construction, and urban/rural residency. Specific factors included in the wealth index vary from country to country (for details see http://www.dhsprogram.com/topics/wealth-index/Wealth-Index-Construction.cfm). Key moderating factors include prior birth interval (minimum of 24 months between births), presence of a skilled birth attendant (presence of doctor or nurse) at delivery, immunization (coded 1 if children received recommended immunizations including BCG, DPT 1 and Polio 1, and 0 otherwise) within 2 months of birth, year of the survey, per-capita income (GDP per capita), per capita expenditure on health and per capita expenditures on foreign aid in the 3 years prior to the survey. We only consider the first round of immunizations so we can include the youngest children in the analysis. The national level data on per capita income and per capita health expenditures were gathered from the World Bank [67]. If data for a specific DHS survey year were not available for a country, values within 3 years of the DHS survey year were used. Data on foreign aid were obtained from the AidData.org database [68]. Initially, we categorized aid by sectors including agriculture, health, reproductive health, water development, and all other aid. Per capita aid in all of these sectors except water were weakly associated with poor child health outcomes. Because we are interested in moderating factors that improve child health, analysis reported here only includes per capita foreign aid for water development. Several other household and child characteristics are associated with children’s health in developing countries [18]. This analysis includes maternal age, child’s age (in the models for nutritional status), child’s birth order, sex of the child, whether the child was a twin, presence of the father, marital status of the mother, household size, maternal employment and whether or not the father has at least some secondary education. Younger mothers may not be as likely to have resources and experience they can use to promote greater health for their children. As children age, their nutritional status (height-for-age Z-score) deteriorates relative to the WHO standard (see Fig. 1) because they do not receive adequate nutrition and are at risk of infections leading to diarrhea. Twins and children with more older siblings are at higher risk of mortality and undernutrition. Male children have higher rates of mortality but there is generally not a great gender difference in access to calories. The presence of a father in the home has been shown to be associated with better child outcomes [69–71]. For example, Dearden et al. found that children who saw their father daily or weekly at both one and 5 years of age had higher HAZ scores than children who saw their fathers less often at either or both ages (2012) [70]. Finally, father’s education provides an additional resource that may benefit children independent of maternal education and household wealth. We also include marital status of the mother, household size, and maternal employment to adjust for household structure and mother’s time availability. We considered including breastfeeding practices but measurement of this variable in DHS is not sufficient to capture the timing of exclusive breastfeeding and introduction of other foods into the diet. Educational inequality in children’s nutritional status (height/age z-score) Three regression models are used depending on the distribution of the measure of child health. Logistic regression is used to predict a dichotomous variable indicating mortality in the first month, Cox regression is used to predict child mortality measured in months, and linear regression is used for height for age z-scores. All countries and years are pooled. Regression models for neonatal mortality and nutritional status use multi-level models with country as the level two unit of analysis to account for intra-group correlations within countries. The Cox-regressions include fixed effects for each country. Stata 14.1 was used to estimate all models. Year of the survey, GDP per capita, health expenditures per capita and per capita aid for water development are measured at the national level. Forty-two percent of the households have more than one child under age 5. We estimated models adjusting standard errors for household clustering. Design effect statistics are all well below 2.0 (deff). Moreover, the standard errors in these models were only slightly larger and did not affect our conclusions. Regression coefficients for the three social determinants, maternal education, wealth and urban residence, indicate the degree of socioeconomic inequality in health outcomes: larger coefficients show a steeper gradient of difference between more and less advantaged children. For example, a coefficient of 4.88 for maternal education implies that a child whose mother has post-secondary education will score .25 standard deviations higher on height-for-age than a child whose mother has no education ((4.88*5)/100 = .244), indicating substantial educational inequality. A coefficient of 2.0 would only imply a .10 standard deviation difference between children of the most and least educated mothers. Interaction terms between each of the moderating factors and the social determinants show the degree to which these factors have potential to reduce inequality. If coefficients for interaction terms run counter to the coefficients for social determinants then mitigation is implied. In other words, if the influence of social determinants becomes smaller as the magnitude of moderating variables increase then the main effect of the social determinant and the interaction effect will work in opposite directions. For example, if the coefficient for maternal education is 5.0 and the interaction between birth spacing (coded 0 for short interval and 1 for long interval) is -3.0 then the education gradient is 5.0 for children with a short birth interval and only 2.0 (5 + -3*1 = 2) for children with a longer birth interval, implying that a longer birth interval reduces educational inequality in child nutritional status.

N/A

Based on the information provided, here are some potential innovations that could be used to improve access to maternal health:

1. Mobile Health (mHealth) Solutions: Develop mobile applications or text messaging services that provide pregnant women with important health information, reminders for prenatal appointments, and access to teleconsultations with healthcare providers.

2. Community Health Workers: Train and deploy community health workers who can provide education, support, and basic healthcare services to pregnant women in rural or underserved areas.

3. Telemedicine: Implement telemedicine programs that allow pregnant women to remotely consult with healthcare providers, reducing the need for travel and improving access to prenatal care.

4. Transportation Solutions: Develop transportation initiatives, such as mobile clinics or subsidized transportation services, to ensure that pregnant women can easily access healthcare facilities for prenatal check-ups and delivery.

5. Financial Incentives: Introduce financial incentives, such as conditional cash transfers or vouchers, to encourage pregnant women to seek regular prenatal care and deliver in healthcare facilities.

6. Maternal Health Education Programs: Implement comprehensive maternal health education programs that target both women and their families, providing information on the importance of prenatal care, nutrition, and healthy behaviors during pregnancy.

7. Public-Private Partnerships: Foster collaborations between the public and private sectors to improve access to maternal health services, leveraging the resources and expertise of both sectors.

8. Infrastructure Development: Invest in the development and improvement of healthcare infrastructure, including the construction and equipping of healthcare facilities in underserved areas.

9. Task-Shifting: Train and empower non-physician healthcare providers, such as nurses and midwives, to provide a wider range of maternal health services, thereby increasing access to care.

10. Quality Improvement Initiatives: Implement quality improvement initiatives in healthcare facilities to ensure that pregnant women receive timely, respectful, and evidence-based care throughout their pregnancy and childbirth journey.

These innovations can help address the social inequalities and barriers to accessing maternal health services, ultimately improving the health outcomes for both mothers and children.
AI Innovations Description
Based on the description provided, the recommendation to improve access to maternal health and address social inequality in children’s health in Africa is to implement the following strategies:

1. Improve access to reproductive healthcare: Increase availability and affordability of family planning services to ensure that women have access to birth control methods and can plan their pregnancies. This will help in spacing births and reducing the risk of maternal and child health complications.

2. Enhance skilled birth attendance: Increase the presence of skilled birth attendants, such as doctors and nurses, during childbirth. This can be achieved by training and deploying more healthcare professionals in rural areas where access to healthcare is limited.

3. Increase investment in economic development: Promote economic growth and development in disadvantaged communities to improve the overall living conditions and access to resources for mothers and children. This can be done through job creation, infrastructure development, and poverty reduction programs.

4. Increase per capita health expenditures: Allocate more resources towards healthcare, particularly in disadvantaged areas, to ensure that mothers and children have access to quality healthcare services. This can include improving healthcare infrastructure, increasing the availability of essential medicines and equipment, and strengthening healthcare delivery systems.

5. Strengthen foreign aid for maternal health: Increase foreign aid specifically targeted towards improving maternal health outcomes. This can include funding for training healthcare professionals, improving healthcare facilities, and implementing maternal health programs and interventions.

By implementing these recommendations, it is expected that access to maternal health services will be improved, leading to better health outcomes for both mothers and children. Additionally, addressing social inequality in healthcare will help reduce disparities and ensure that all women and children have equal access to quality healthcare services.
AI Innovations Methodology
To improve access to maternal health, here are some potential recommendations:

1. Mobile health clinics: Implementing mobile health clinics that can travel to remote areas and provide essential maternal health services, such as prenatal care, vaccinations, and postnatal care.

2. Telemedicine: Utilizing telemedicine technology to connect pregnant women in rural areas with healthcare professionals who can provide remote consultations, monitor their health, and offer guidance.

3. Community health workers: Training and deploying community health workers who can provide education, support, and basic healthcare services to pregnant women in underserved areas.

4. Maternal health vouchers: Introducing voucher programs that provide financial assistance to pregnant women, enabling them to access quality maternal healthcare services at accredited facilities.

5. Maternity waiting homes: Establishing maternity waiting homes near healthcare facilities, where pregnant women from remote areas can stay during the final weeks of pregnancy to ensure timely access to skilled birth attendants.

To simulate the impact of these recommendations on improving access to maternal health, a methodology could include the following steps:

1. Define the target population: Identify the specific population group that will be affected by the recommendations, such as pregnant women in rural areas.

2. Collect baseline data: Gather data on the current access to maternal health services in the target population, including factors such as distance to healthcare facilities, availability of skilled birth attendants, and utilization rates.

3. Develop a simulation model: Create a simulation model that incorporates the potential impact of the recommendations on the identified factors. This model should consider variables such as the number of mobile health clinics, the coverage of telemedicine services, the number of trained community health workers, the availability of maternal health vouchers, and the capacity of maternity waiting homes.

4. Input data and run simulations: Input the baseline data into the simulation model and run multiple simulations to assess the potential impact of the recommendations on improving access to maternal health. This could involve adjusting the variables in the model to reflect different scenarios and analyzing the outcomes.

5. Analyze results: Evaluate the results of the simulations to determine the extent to which the recommendations could improve access to maternal health. This could include assessing changes in utilization rates, reduction in travel distances, increase in the availability of skilled birth attendants, and overall improvement in maternal health outcomes.

6. Refine and validate the model: Continuously refine and validate the simulation model based on real-world data and feedback from experts in the field. This will ensure that the model accurately represents the potential impact of the recommendations and can be used for future decision-making.

By following this methodology, policymakers and healthcare stakeholders can gain insights into the potential benefits of implementing these recommendations and make informed decisions to improve access to maternal health.

Share this:
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp
Email