ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2022
Is ignorance of the weekly iron and folic acid scheme among adolescents the deciding factor for its suboptimal utilization and ineffectiveness? A cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perceived Barriers and Enablers for Taking Iron-Folic Acid Supplementation Regularly Among Adolescent Girls in Indonesia: A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Health Education and Promotion Interventions to Mitigate Geophagic Practise: A Scoping Review.Public health reviews · 2025Review
- Adherence to weekly iron folic acid supplementation and associated factors among adolescent girls - A mixed-method study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTargeting the huge burden of adolescent anemia, the Weekly Iron and Folic acid Supplementation (WIFS) was launched by the Government of India. Few studies have been done to assess the effective functioning of the program since its inception. The present study was done to assess the knowledge WIFS among adolescents of Madhya Pradesh and the associated factors. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional study was done in a total of six districts (3 districts where the national adolescent program was implemented and 3 districts where it was not) of Madhya Pradesh. Multistage stratified random sampling technique was used for the enrollment of 3213 adolescent boys and girls, and a prestructured and validated tool was used to collect paperless data. Ethical approval and consent from the participants were obtained. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v21.
resultsIt was observed that the knowledge of WIFS was more among adolescent girls (29.3%) as compared to adolescent boys (14.1%). More of the adolescent girls received Iron and folic acid tablets as compared to adolescent boys (60.8% girls vs. 24.1% boys). Mostly, the adolescents got Iron tablets from school followed by Anganwadi and PHC/CHC. Girls, rural location, literacy, below poverty line status, knowledge of anemia, adolescents who got iron and albendazole tablets, and adequate consumption of iron tablets (>4) were associated with higher knowledge of WIFS.
conclusionThe knowledge of WIFS was found to be less in adolescent boys. There is a hint of the fact that effective execution of the program among its beneficiaries leads to an automatic increased knowledge of the program, at least among the beneficiaries. Thus, an indirect but significant indirect finding is that the nationwide WIFS program needs to be put to greater focus among the adolescent boys, apart from its major focus on the female gender among most age groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.