↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence and associated factors of clinical manifestations of vitamin a deficiency among preschool children in asgede-tsimbla rural district, north Ethiopia, a community based cross sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Public Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prevalence and associated factors of clinical manifestations of vitamin a deficiency among preschool children in asgede-tsimbla rural district, north Ethiopia, a community based cross sectional study
Published in
Archives of Public Health, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13690-016-0122-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tesfalem Abrha, Yonas Girma, Kebede Haile, Mezgebe Hailu, Mengistu Hailemariam

Abstract

Vitamin A Deficiency is a common form of micronutrient deficiency, globally affecting 33.3 % of preschool-age children. An estimated of 44.4 % of preschool children in Africa were at risk for vitamin A deficiency. In Ethiopia, vitamin A deficiency leads to 80,000 deaths a year and affects 61 % of preschool children. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and associated factors with the night blindness, Bitot's spot and vitamin A intake among preschool children in rural area, Asgede-Tsimbla district, North Ethiopia. Community based cross sectional study was conducted from January 27 to March 7, 2014. A total 1230 preschool children were selected by systematic random sampling from 8 randomly selected kebelles (smallest administrative unit). Structured and pretested questionnaires adapted from relevant studies and WHO/FAO was for data collection. In addition, sex, age, and height were taken and filled to Emergency Nutrition Assessment (ENA) for Standardized Monitoring and Assessment of Relief and Transition (SMART) 2007 software to convert the nutritional data into Z-scores of the indices. The data was then transported to SPSS version 20. Bivariate and Multivariable binary logistic regressions were carried out to investigate the effect of each independent variable on the dependent variable. Statistical significance was set at p-value < 0.05. The odds of Bitot's spots (1.46 %) and night blindness (1.22 %) were higher than the WHO Cut-off levels used to define a public health problem. The odds of night blindness was 4 times higher among children belonging to family size greater or equal to four [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 4.18, 95 % CI = 1.15,15.3] and 6 times higher among children of illiterate mothers [AOR = 5.96 , 95 % CI = 1.33,26.69]. The odds of Bitot's spots was 5.35 times higher among children belonging to family size greater or more four [AOR =5.35; 95 % CI = 1.49, 19.2], 4.75 times higher among children of illiterate mothers [AOR = 4.75, 95 % CI =1.32, 17.18] and 6 times higher in males than females [AOR = 5.8, 95 % CI = 1.65, 20.46]. The study revealed that night blindness and Bitot's spots are major nutritional problems in the study area. The independent predictors of night blindness were mother illiteracy status and large family size and also for Bitot's spots were mother illiteracy status, male sex of child and large family size. Therefore, the need to increase educational level of mother, use of family planning of women and emphasis on male children and children from large family size by involving the Education sector, Health sector, (Federal Ministry of Health) FMOH and (Tigray Regional Health Bureau) TRHB is crucial.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 152 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 19%
Student > Bachelor 20 13%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 5%
Other 7 5%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 51 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 36 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 17%
Social Sciences 12 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 56 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,456,080
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Public Health
#181
of 1,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,525
of 315,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Public Health
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,164 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.