|

Is Unwanted Birth Associated with Child Malnutrition in Bangladesh?

Md. Mosfequr Rahman

First published online:

Abstract / Summary
CONTEXT

The association between unintended pregnancy and maternal and child health has been well documented. However, the relationship of unintended pregnancy with child malnutrition is not well understood, and may be important in countries such as Bangladesh that have high levels of these events.

METHODS

Data from the 2011 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey on 6,506 last-born, singleton children younger than five were used to investigate the relationship between pregnancy intendedness and the prevalence of stunting, wasting and underweight during early childhood. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify associations.

RESULTS

Substantial proportions of children were stunted (40%), wasted (16%) and underweight (35%) at the time of the survey. Mothers reported that at the time of conception, 14% of their index pregnancies had been unwanted and 16% had been mistimed. Compared with children whose conception had been intended, those whose conception had been unwanted were more likely to be stunted (46% vs. 39%), wasted (19% vs. 15%) or underweight (43% vs. 33%). In regression analyses, children who had been unwanted at the time of conception had an elevated risk of being stunted (odds ratio, 1.4), wasted (1.4) or underweight (1.3).

CONCLUSION

Maternal pregnancy intentions are associated with child stunting, wasting and underweight. If these associations are causal, preventing unwanted pregnancies may help reduce the prevalence of childhood malnutrition in Bangladesh.

International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2015, 41(2):80–88, doi: 10.1363/4108015

Despite the substantial progress made during the past decade in reducing its prevalence, child malnutrition is still a major public health problem, especially in resource-poor countries. Malnutrition is related to macronutrient deficiency and is characterized by stunting, wasting and underweight. Stunting, defined as insufficient height for age, is an indicator of chronic undernutrition, and is the result of prolonged food deprivation or of disease or illness; wasting, or insufficient mass for height, is an indicator of acute undernutrition, and is the result of relatively recent food deprivation or illness; and underweight, or insufficient weight for age, is a composite indicator that reflects both acute and chronic undernutrition, although it cannot distinguish between them.1 Globally, an estimated 165 million children younger than five (26%) are stunted, 52 million (8%) are wasted and 100 million (16%) are underweight.2 Malnutrition is responsible for 35% of the burden of disease in children younger than five, and 11% of the disability-adjusted life years (healthy years of life) lost worldwide.3

Bangladesh has one of the highest rates of child malnutrition in the world,4 and malnutrition is the country’s leading cause of child morbidity and mortality.5 Two of every five children in Bangladesh suffer from moderate-to-severe underweight,6 and roughly two-thirds of deaths among children younger than five are attributable to undernutrition.7 Despite the importance of early child nutrition for survival and long-term development, the international nutrition community has had difficulty reaching a consensus on how to combat child undernutrition.8,9

An ample body of research has examined the biological,10,11 environmental,12,13 and socioeconomic14,15 correlates of child malnutrition, but researchers have only begun to investigate many aspects of the social environment. Moreover, research indicates that maternal education,16 maternal autonomy,17 maternal body mass index (BMI),18 maternal height,19 household wealth,20 urban residence,21 and having a safe source of drinking water and hygienic toilet facilities22 are positively associated with child nutrition. A psychological factor that might influence a child’s risk of malnutrition is whether the pregnancy was unintended—either unwanted (the parent did not desire any, or any more, children) or mistimed (the pregnancy occurred earlier than desired).23 A parent’s feelings toward a child born as a result of unwanted pregnancy may adversely affect the child’s health if these feelings contribute to conscious or unconscious neglect of the child, resulting in inadequate provision of nutrition, lack of parent-child bonding and inattention to the child’s health care needs.24 Researchers have attempted to model the associations between maternal pregnancy intendedness and child survival and health outcomes. Barber and colleagues hypothesized that various pathways link unwanted childbearing, child health and mother-child relationships, and suggested that children who had been unwanted at the time of conception may suffer more neglect and abuse than those who had been wanted.25 Women whose pregnancies are unwanted tend to initiate antenatal care later than do women whose pregnancies are wanted.26,27 In a study of postnatal outcomes, rates of infant mortality (death during the first 28 days of life) were higher following unwanted pregnancies than following other pregnancies.28 In an analysis of Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data from five developing countries, Montgomery and colleagues found that unwantedness was linked to child malnutrition in the Dominican Republic, but not in the other four countries.29 Unwanted pregnancies have also been linked to adverse outcomes and behaviors—including low birth weight, neonatal mortality, absence of breast-feeding and poor parental care—in several U.S. studies.30,31 However, little evidence exists in these studies, or in studies in poorer countries, of an association between mistimed (as opposed to unwanted) pregnancies and adverse outcomes.30–32 The high rates of mistimed and unwanted pregnancies in developing countries make it important to study the relationship between such pregnancies and child nutrition and growth; it is plausible that adverse nutritional outcomes are more likely for a child if the pregnancy had been unintended than if it had been intended.

Although overall fertility has decreased and contraceptive use has increased in Bangladesh, one in four pregnancies are unwanted or mistimed.33 Such pregnancies are associated with an elevated risk of adverse outcomes for women, fetuses and infants.34,35 The direct relationship between unintended childbearing and childhood mortality has been well documented in both the developed28 and developing29,36 world. However, far fewer studies have focused on the relationship between unintended pregnancy and nutritional status. Most of these studies have been conducted in developing countries, where malnutrition remains a major public health problem. Marston and Cleland found that in Peru, the odds of stunting were 15% greater if a pregnancy had been unwanted rather than wanted, although in Egypt the likelihood of stunting was lower if a pregnancy had been mistimed or unwanted than if it had been wanted.30 Unwanted fertility was associated with low height-for-age in the Dominican Republic,29 and an analysis of data from the 1998 Bolivia DHS found that children aged 12–35 months were about a third more likely to be stunted if their birth had been mistimed or unwanted rather than intended.22 However, these studies have examined only the relationship between pregnancy intendedness and stunting; no study has assessed where there is an association between pregnancy intention and underweight or wasting (the latter is an important outcome to assess because it is an indicator of acute nutritional change). Understanding the relationship between pregnancy intendedness and the three types of child malnutrition is particularly important in Bangladesh, where malnutrition is a major public health problem4 and a barrier to development. The aim of this study, therefore, was to use a nationally representative sample to assess the association between maternal pregnancy intentions and child stunting, wasting and underweight in Bangladesh.

 

METHODS

Sample

This study analyzed data from the most recent Bangladesh DHS, which surveyed a nationally representative sample of women of childbearing age between July and December 2011. A two-stage, stratified cluster sample of 600 primary sampling units (207 in urban areas and 393 in rural areas), derived from the 2011 Bangladesh Population and Housing Census, served as the sampling frame. A total of 18,222 eligible women aged 12–49 were selected to participate in the survey; 17,842 (98%) of these women were interviewed. Respondents provided information about themselves, their children and their household. In addition, weight and height measurements for children aged 0–59 months were obtained by trained data collectors according to the standard DHS fieldwork protocol,33 using lightweight scales with digital screens and height/length boards specially produced for use in survey settings. Details of data collection and management procedures are described elsewhere.33

For the current analysis, the data set consisted of 7,066 last-born singleton children* who were aged 59 months or younger at the time of the survey. Three hundred and seventy-three of these children were excluded because of missing anthropometric measurements, 149 because the combination of their weight and their height was implausible and 38 because their reported height was not within credible limits, yielding a final sample of 6,506 children.

 

Measures

Maternal pregnancy intendedness was determined by asking women to recall their feelings at the time of conception for each birth within the past five years. Women were asked whether the pregnancy had been planned (wanted at that time), mistimed (wanted later) or unwanted (not wanted at any time). Because the personal, partnership- related, social and political realities of unwanted pregnancies are different from those of mistimed pregnancies, the use of separate categories may better reflect the way women think about a pregnancy.23

Children’s weights and heights were converted to weight-for-age and height-for-age standard deviation units (z-scores) using the World Health Organization’s child growth standards.37 Children were classified as stunted if their height was at least two standard deviations below the mean for their age; as wasted if their weight was at least two standard deviations below the mean for their height; and as underweight if their weight was at least two standard deviations below the mean for their age.

A variety of child and maternal socioeconomic and demographic characteristics that have been theoretically or empirically linked to child nutrition16–22 or maternal pregnancy intentions38–40 were also included in the analysis.

The children’s characteristics were age, sex, birth size, preceding birth interval, breast-feeding status and vaccination history. Age was classified as 0–11, 12–23, 24–35 or 36–59 months. Sex was included because in South Asia, male children are valued more than female children, and receive preferential treatment, including better nutrition and care.41 Because birth weight was not known for many children, particularly those born at home, mothers’ estimates of their child’s size at birth were used instead; though subjective, a mother’s report that a baby was "very small" or "smaller than average" is a useful proxy for objectively confirmed low birth weight.33 Birth intervals were categorized as up to 23 months, 24–35 months, 36–47 months, or 48 or more months. Dichotomous variables indicated whether a child was still breast-feeding, which is strongly associated with child health outcomes in developing countries,42 and whether he or she had ever been vaccinated.

Maternal characteristics included in the analyses were age, educational level, BMI, height and autonomy. Maternal age was classified as 15–24, 25–34 or 35–49, in accordance with research that has found that infant and child mortality varies substantially according to these groupings.43 Educational attainment was categorized as none, any primary (1–5 years), any secondary (6–12 years) or higher (≥13 years). Maternal BMI, which is strongly linked child nutritional status,44 was classified as thin (<18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5–24.99 kg/m2) or overweight/obese (≥25.0 kg/m2). Height was a dichotomous variable indicating whether a woman was at least 145 cm tall; studies from South Asia and other developing regions suggest that this cutoff point is useful for assessing risk of adverse birth and early childhood outcomes.45

Women’s autonomy was included because a growing body of research suggests that enhancing such autonomy may be an important intervention for improving child nutrition.46 In the current analysis, maternal autonomy was measured using women’s responses to four questions that asked who makes decisions in the household regarding obtaining maternal health care, making large household purchases, visiting family and relatives, and obtaining child health care. Response options for each category were the respondent alone, the respondent and her husband or partner, the respondent and someone other than her husband or partner, her husband or partner alone, someone else or other. For each of the four categories, a value of 1 was assigned if the respondent was involved in making the decision, and 0 if she was not; the values were summed to yield a score of 0–4 (Cronbach’s alpha, 0.91).

Finally, analyses included several household characteristics: wealth, area of residence, source of drinking water, type of toilet facilities and media access. The wealth variable categorized respondents into quintiles according to the household’s score on the DHS wealth index, which is based on the household’s amenities, assets and living conditions.47 The other measures indicated whether the household was in an urban or rural area, and whether it had a protected source of drinking water (e.g., piped water, a protected well), sanitary toilet facilities and some degree of media access.

 

Statistical Analyses

Descriptive statistics were calculated for the sample, and chi-square tests were used to identify bivariate associations between pregnancy intendedness (as well as other maternal, child and household characteristics) and child stunting, wasting and underweight. In all analyses, the significance level was set at p&;.05 (two-tailed). Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the relationships of intendedness with stunting, wasting and underweight after adjustment for theoretically relevant variables. The multivariate models omitted two variables: vaccination (because data were missing for 61% of children) and birth interval (because inclusion of this variable would have resulted in multicollinearity with the birth-order variable, as 34% of children were first-born and thus had no preceding birth interval). Omitting respondents who were missing data could have created selection bias in the analytic sample and affected the results of the models.48 However, in alternative analyses not reported here, inclusion of the two variables in multivariate models did not substantially change the results. The multicollinearity of the remaining variables was checked by examining the variance inflation factors; in all cases, the values were less than 2.0, indicating that multicollinearity was low. All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 20.0 for Windows and took into account sample weighting related to the complex design of the DHS.

 

RESULTS

Substantial proportions of children exhibited stunting (40%), wasting (16%) and underweight (35%; Table 1). Mothers reported that 16% of pregnancies were mistimed and 14% were unwanted. One in three children were first-born, one in six were described by their mother as being smaller than average at birth and nearly two-thirds were still breast-feeding. Half of the mothers were aged 13–24, and four-fifths had some formal education. Twenty-seven percent of mothers were thin, 13% were short in stature and 19% had no decision-making power in the household. Eleven percent of households did not have a protected supply of drinking water, and 21% did not have sanitary toilet facilities.

Levels of stunting, wasting and underweight all varied by pregnancy intendedness (Table 2). Children whose conception had been unwanted had the highest prevalence of stunting (46%), wasting (20%) and underweight (43%), while those whose conception had been intended had the lowest (39%, 15% and 33%, respectively). The proportion of children who were stunted and underweight also differed by age; the prevalence of stunting was highest among children aged 12–23 months (50%), and that of underweight was highest among those aged 36–59 months (41%). Levels of stunting, wasting and underweight varied as well by other child, maternal and household characteristics, notably birth order, birth size, maternal education, maternal BMI, maternal height, wealth, area of residence, source of drinking water, type of toilet facilities and media access.

The multivariate regression models indicated that pregnancy intendedness was associated with subsequent stunting, wasting and underweight among children in Bangladesh (Table 3). Compared with children who had been wanted at the time of conception, those who had been unwanted were more likely to be stunted (odds ratio, 1.4), wasted (1.4) or underweight (1.3). Children aged 12–23 months were more likely than children aged 0–11 months to be stunted (6.4) or underweight (4.6). Fifth and higher order births were associated with elevated odds of stunting (1.6) or underweight (1.5) relative to first births. Children who had been smaller than average at birth were more likely than other children to be stunted (1.9), wasted (2.0) or underweight (2.3), while children who were breast-feeding at the time of the interview were less likely than children who were not breast-feeding to be stunted (0.8), wasted (0.7) or underweight (0.8). The odds of malnutrition were generally higher among children of thin, obese or overweight women than among those of normal-weight women, and lower among children in wealthier households than among those in the poorest households. Malnutrition was negatively associated with maternal education, maternal height and having media access, and positively associated with rural residence and lack of sanitary toilet facilities.

 

DISCUSSION

This study suggests that unwanted pregnancy is associated with increased likelihoods of stunting, wasting and underweight among children in Bangladesh, even after adjustment for children’s, mother’s and household characteristics. This finding corroborates the results of previous studies of Bolivia22 and Peru.30 Those analyses differed from the current study in that they were not restricted to a mother’s last-born child, but included either all children younger than 60 months (Peru) or all children aged 36 months or younger (Bolivia). The associations between intendedness and malnutrition might be explained by a mother’s attitudes and behavior; her feelings about having an unwanted child might contribute to conscious or unconscious neglect of the child, reduce her ability to cope with a young child’s everyday needs and diminish the quality of her caregiving behaviors, leading to negative health consequences for the child.49,50 Because stunting reflects cumulative growth, it is likely to be influenced by suboptimal caregiving. On the other hand, wasting may be less affected than stunting by the quality of maternal caregiving,51,52 because wasting reflects acute nutritional deficiencies that may be attributable to other factors, such as seasonal variations in dietary intake and hygiene-related conditions (e.g., severe diarrhea, which can cause malnutrition, is more common in the summer than in the winter).18 The mechanism underpinning the association of pregnancy intendedness with childhood underweight may involve deficiencies in maternal caregiving, dietary deficiencies or both.

The relevance of other characteristics of the child, mother and household to child malnutrition must not be underestimated. Child age is strongly associated with the risk of stunting and underweight; consistent with earlier findings,53 our results suggest that children aged 12–23 months have a substantially higher risk of stunting and underweight than do children aged 0–11 months. The risk of stunting and underweight also was elevated among children aged 24–35 or 36–59 months, although to a smaller degree, perhaps because care practices and the availability of food systematically improve as children reach these ages. Moreover, during the third year of life, children become more responsible for feeding themselves, which may contribute to adequate energy and protein intake. Not surprisingly, a child’s size at birth appears to be an important indicator of malnutrition risk, as children with a lower-than-average birth size were more likely than other children to be stunted, wasted or underweight.

Children of mothers who were thin or were overweight or obese generally had a higher risk of stunting, wasting and underweight than did children whose mothers had a BMI in the normal range. This finding is not unexpected, because maternal nutritional status has been linked to child’s nutritional status.44 Consistent with prior research,54,55 this study also found that children in wealthier households tend to have a lower risk of stunting and underweight than do children in the poorest households.

Although this study used a large, nationally representative sample, it has several limitations. Because the data were cross-sectional, causal relationships between women’s, children’s and household characteristics and the three child malnutrition outcomes cannot be established. As mentioned earlier, the wasting measure is potentially problematic because it involves an interaction between two outcomes (low height for age and low weight for age) that may be affected by the characteristics being investigated.18 However, this variable was included because it is particularly sensitive to acute growth disturbances. Another limitation is the retrospective assessment of pregnancy intendedness. Women underreport unintended pregnancy when asked about intendedness retrospectively; a woman who did not intend to become pregnant at the time of conception may report after giving birth that the pregnancy had been intended.56 Women’s recall of pregnancy intention at the time of conception may be influenced by experiences during pregnancy, delivery and the postpartum period.57 Another potential limitation is bias resulting from uncontrolled confounders, such as maternal depression, maternal anxiety and abuse of the mother. Information about these events was not collected in the DHS. However, any associations between pregnancy intendedness and postpartum depression, anxiety or abuse would strengthen the relationship of unwanted and mistimed pregnancies on malnutrition. Finally, fathers’ pregnancy intentions were not measured in this study.

In conclusion, our findings provide important insights into the relationship between maternal pregnancy intentions and child malnutrition in Bangladesh. Although the relationship is complex, some patterns are discernible, and the results indicate that unwanted pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of subsequent stunting, wasting and underweight among Bangladeshi children. Therefore, current policies toward reducing child malnutrition and child mortality may need to address unwanted pregnancy. Policymakers should pay particular attention to factors (such as contraceptive failure) that directly or indirectly increase unwanted pregnancy. Efforts at reducing unwanted pregnancy may reduce not only child malnutrition, but also the high fertility rate that contributes to population growth in Bangladesh. The results of this study may also be relevant to other resource-poor countries where child malnutrition is common, and to clinicians who assess children with nutritional problems. However, longitudinal studies are needed to investigate the potential mechanisms that mediate the association between maternal pregnancy intendedness and child malnutrition.

Footnotes

*Twins were omitted because they are more likely than singletons to be undernourished.

The DHS data set flags cases in which a person’s weight and height would yield a BMI that is implausibly low (<12 kg/m2) or implausibly high (>60 kg/m2).

References

1. World Health Organization (WHO), Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition, Geneva: WHO, 1997.

2. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), WHO and World Bank, Levels & Trends in Child Malnutrition, New York: UNICEF; Geneva: WHO; and Washington, DC: World Bank, 2012.

3. Black RE et al., Maternal and child undernutrition: global and regional exposures and health consequences, Lancet, 2008, 371(9608):243–260.

4. Helen Keller International, Household and community level determinants of malnutrition in Bangladesh, Nutritional Surveillance Project Bulletin, Dhaka, Bangladesh: Helen Keller International, 2006, No. 17.

5. Government of Bangladesh and United Nations, Millennium Development Goals: Bangladesh Progress Report 2007, Dhaka, Bangladesh: Government of Bangladesh, 2007.

6. UNICEF, The State of the World’s Children 2009: Maternal and Newborn Health, New York: UNICEF, 2008.

7. World Bank, Repositioning Nutrition as Central to Development: A Strategy for Large-Scale Action, Washington, DC: World Bank, 2006.

8. Bryce J et al., Countdown to 2015: tracking intervention coverage for child survival, Lancet, 2006, 368(9541):1067–1076.

9. Morris SS, Cogill B and Uauy R, Effective international action against undernutrition: Why has it proven so difficult and what can be done to accelerate progress? Lancet, 2008, 371(9612):608–621.

10. Baqui AH et al., Malnutrition, cell-mediated immune deficiency, and diarrhea: a community-based longitudinal study in rural Bangladeshi children, American Journal of Epidemiology, 1993, 137(3):355–365.

11. Tarleton JL et al., Cognitive effects of diarrhea, malnutrition, and Entamoeba histolytica infection on school age children in Dhaka, Bangladesh, American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 2006, 74(3):475–481.

12. Best CM et al., Parental tobacco use is associated with increased risk of child malnutrition in Bangladesh, Nutrition, 2007, 23(10):731–738.

13. Bomela NJ, Social, economic, health and environmental determinants of child nutritional status in three Central Asian republics, Public Health Nutrition, 2009, 12(10):1871–1877.

14. Ahmed T and Ahmed AM, Reducing the burden of malnutrition in Bangladesh, BMJ, 2009, 339:b4490, <http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b4490>, accessed Apr. 20, 2015.

15. van de Poel E et al., Socioeconomic inequality in malnutrition in developing countries, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2008, 86(4):282–291.

16. Frost MB, Forste R and Haas DW, Maternal education and child nutritional status in Bolivia: finding the links, Social Science & Medicine, 2005, 60(2):395–407.

17. Shroff M et al., Maternal autonomy is inversely related to child stunting in Andhra Pradesh, India, Maternal and Child Nutrition, 2009, 5(1):64–74.

18. Rahman M et al., Maternal exposure to intimate partner violence and the risk of undernutrition among children younger than 5 years in Bangladesh, American Journal of Public Health, 2012, 102(7):1336–1345.

19. Özaltin E, Hill K and Subramanian SV, Association of maternal stature with offspring mortality, underweight, and stunting in low- to middle-income countries, Journal of the American Medical Association, 2010, 303(15):1507–1516.

20. Hong R and Mishra V, Effect of wealth inequality on chronic under-nutrition in Cambodian children, Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 2006, 24(1):89–99.

21. van de Poel E, O’Donnell O and van Doorslaer E, Are urban children really healthier? Evidence from 47 developing countries, Social Science & Medicine, 2007, 65(10):1986–2003.

22. Shapiro-Mendoza C et al., Parental pregnancy intention and early childhood stunting: findings from Bolivia, International Journal of Epidemiology, 2005, 34(2):387–396.

23. Santelli J et al., The measurement and meaning of unintended pregnancy, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2003, 35(2):94–101.

24. Parnell AM, ed., Contraceptive Use and Controlled Fertility: Health Issues for Women and Children, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989.

25. Barber JS, Axinn WG and Thornton A, Unwanted childbearing, health, and mother-child relationships, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 1999, 40(3):231–257.

26. Joyce TJ, Kaestner R and Korenman S, The effect of pregnancy intention on child development, Demography, 2000, 37(1):83–94.

27. Pagnini DL and Reichman NE, Psychosocial factors and the timing of prenatal care among women in New Jersey’s HealthStart program, Family Planning Perspectives, 2000, 32(2):56–64.

28. Bustan MN and Coker AL, Maternal attitude toward pregnancy and the risk of neonatal death, American Journal of Public Health, 1994, 84(3):411–414.

29. Montgomery MR et al., The consequences of imperfect fertility control for children’s survival, health, and schooling, DHS Analytical Reports, Calverton, MD, USA: Macro International, 1997, No. 7.

30. Marston C and Cleland J, Do unintended pregnancies carried to term lead to adverse outcomes for mother and child? An assessment in five developing countries, Population Studies, 2003, 57(1):77–93.

31. Taylor JS and Cabral HJ, Are women with an unintended pregnancy less likely to breastfeed? Journal of Family Practice, 2002, 51(5):431–436.

32. Eggleston E, Tsui AO and Kotelchuck M, Unintended pregnancy and low birthweight in Ecuador, American Journal of Public Health, 2001, 91(5):808–810.

33. National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Mitra and Associates, and ORC Macro, Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2011, Dhaka: NIPORT and Mitra and Associates; and Calverton, MD, USA: ORC Macro, 2013.

34. Cheng D et al., Unintended pregnancy and associated maternal preconception, prenatal and postpartum behaviors, Contraception, 2009, 79(3):194–198.

35. Dott M et al., Association between pregnancy intention and reproductive-health related behaviors before and after pregnancy recognition, National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997–2002, Maternal and Child Health Journal, 2010, 14(3):373–381.

36. Chalasani S, Casterline JB and Koenig MA, Unwanted childbearing and child survival in Bangladesh, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America, New York, March 29–31, 2007.

37. de Onis M et al., WHO Child Growth Standards: Length/Height-for-Age, Weight-for-Age, Weight-for-Length, Weight-for-Height and Body Mass Index-for-Age: Methods and Development, Geneva: WHO, 2006.

38. Rahman M, Women’s autonomy and unintended pregnancy among currently pregnant women in Bangladesh, Maternal and Child Health Journal, 2012, 16(6):1206–1214.

39. Rahman M et al., Intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy among Bangladeshi women, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2012, 27(15):2999–3015.

40. Stephenson R et al., Domestic violence, contraceptive use, and unwanted pregnancy in rural India, Studies in Family Planning, 2008, 39(3):177–186.

41. Ackerson LK and Subramanian SV, Intimate partner violence and death among infants and children in India, Pediatrics, 2009, 124(5):e878–e889, <http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/124/5/e878.full>, accessed Apr. 21, 2015.

42. Black RE et al., Maternal and child undernutrition and overweight in low-income and middle-income countries, Lancet, 2013, 382(9890):427–451.

43. Rutstein SO, Factors associated with trends in infant and child mortality in developing countries during the 1990s, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2000, 78(10):1256–1270.

44. James WP et al., The potential use of maternal size in priority setting when combating childhood malnutrition, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1999, 53(2):112–119.

45. Christian P, Maternal height and risk of child mortality and undernutrition, Journal of the American Medical Association, 2010, 303(15):1539–1540.

46. Ruel MT and Alderman H, Nutrition-sensitive interventions and programmes: How can they help to accelerate progress in improving maternal and child nutrition? Lancet, 2013, 382(9891):536–551.

47. Rutstein SO and Johnson K, The DHS Wealth Index, DHS Comparative Reports, Calverton, MD, USA: ORC Macro, 2004, No. 6.

48. Ghosh S and Pahwa P, Assessing bias associated with missing data from Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health: an application, paper presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Denver, CO, USA, Aug. 3–7, 2008.

49. Ammaniti M et al., Malnutrition and dysfunctional mother-child feeding interactions: clinical assessment and research implications, Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 2004, 23(3):259–271.

50. Engle PL, Bentley M and Pelto G, The role of care in nutrition programmes: current research and a research agenda, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 2000, 59(1):25–35.

51. Hien NN and Kam S, Nutritional status and the characteristics related to malnutrition in children under five years of age in Nghean, Vietnam, Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 2008, 41(4):232–240.

52. Marín CM et al., Seasonal change in nutritional status among young children in an urban shanty town in Peru, Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 1996, 90(4):442–445.

53. Pongou R, Ezzati M and Salomon JA, Household and community socioeconomic and environmental determinants of child nutritional status in Cameroon, BMC Public Health, 2006, Vol. 6, Art. 98, doi:10.1186/1471-2458-6-98, accessed Apr. 28, 2015.

54. Doak C et al., The underweight/overweight household: an exploration of household sociodemographic and dietary factors in China, Public Health Nutrition, 2002, 5(1A):215–221.

55. Hong R, Banta JE and Betancourt JA, Relationship between household wealth inequality and chronic childhood under-nutrition in Bangladesh, International Journal for Equity in Health, 2006, Vol. 5, Art. 15, <http://dx.doi.org/10.1186%2F1475-9276-5-15>, accessed Apr. 21, 2015.

56. Joyce T, Kaestner R and Korenman S, On the validity of retrospective assessments of pregnancy intention, Demography, 2002, 39(1):199–213.

57. Mohllajee AP et al., Pregnancy intention and its relationship to birth and maternal outcomes, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2007, 109(3):678–686.

Author's Affiliations

Md. Mosfequr Rahman is associate professor, Department of Population Science and Human Resource Development, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh.

Author contact: [email protected]

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Guttmacher Institute.