Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33048926›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Food taboos and related misperceptions during pregnancy in Mekelle city, Tigray, Northern Ethiopia.

Freweini Gebrearegay Tela, Lemlem Weldegerima Gebremariam, Selemawit Asfaw Beyene

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Freweini Gebrearegay TelaDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Mekelle University, Tigray, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-0890-770X
Lemlem Weldegerima GebremariamDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Mekelle University, Tigray, Ethiopia.
Selemawit Asfaw BeyeneDepartment of Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Mekelle University, Tigray, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-2595-5885

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMost communities, rural or urban, have taboos regarding foods to avoid during pregnancy, and most have local explanations for why certain foods should be avoided. Such taboos may have health benefits, but they also can have large nutritional and health costs to mothers and fetuses. As such, understanding local pregnancy food taboos is an important public health goal, especially in contexts where food resources are limited. Despite this, information regarding food taboos is limited in Ethiopia. Therefore, this study assessed food taboos, related misconceptions, and associated factors among pregnant women in Northern Ethiopia.

methodsA cross-sectional study of 332 pregnant women in antenatal care (ANC) follow-up at selected private clinics in Mekelle city, Tigray, Ethiopa, recruited between April and May, 2017. Using a semi-structured questionnaire, we assessed whether respondents' observed food taboos, what types of foods they avoided, their perceived reasons for avoidance, diversity of respondents' diets during pregnancy, and respondents' socio-demographic characteristics. After reporting frequency statistics for categorical variables and central tendencies (mean and standard deviation) of continuous variables, bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify the socio-demographic factors and diet diversity associated with food taboo practices.

resultsAround 12% of the pregnant women avoided at least one type of food during their current pregnancy for one or more reasons. These mothers avoided eating items such as yogurt, banana, legumes, honey, and "kollo" (roasted barley and wheat). The most common reasons given for the avoidances were that the foods were (mistakenly) believed to cause: abortion; abdominal cramps in the mother and newborn; prolonged labor; or coating of the fetus's body. Maternal education (diploma and above) (AOR: 4.55, 95% CI: 1.93, 10.31) and marital status (single) were found to be negatively associated (protective factors) with observances of pregnancy food taboos. Approximately 79% of respondents had pregnancy diets that were insufficiently diverse, although we did not find any statistical evidence that this was associated with adhering to food taboos.

conclusionThe misconceptions related to pregnancy food taboos should be discouraged insofar as they may restrict women's consumption of nutritious foods which could support maternal health and healthy fetal development. Health providers should counsel pregnant women and their husbands about appropriate pregnancy nutrition during ANC visits.

Indexed as

CitiesTabooAdultDemographyDietEthiopiaFemaleHumansNutrition AssessmentPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID33048926
PMCPMC7553351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.