ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2025
Can nutrition-sensitive agriculture interventions address intersectional inequalities in women's diets? A mediation analysis using cross-sectional trial data from Odisha, India.
Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImproving nutrition for all requires understanding how interventions influence nutrition inequalities within society. Intersectionality, which considers how multiple disadvantages intersect, may offer more precise insight into the equity of these interventions.
objectivesUsing an intersectionality-informed approach and mediation with exposure-mediator interaction, we investigated how participation in nutrition-sensitive agriculture interventions tested in the UPAVAN trial affected inequalities in women's diets in Odisha, India.
methodsWe analyzed cross-sectional endline data from 3294 mothers of children aged 0-23 months in 111 UPAVAN intervention villages. We estimated dietary inequalities as excess relative risk of minimum dietary diversity (MDD-W) according to scheduled tribe (ST) identity (ST or non-ST), education (≥5, <5 y), or wealth (higher, lower) and comparing intersectional groups that combine ST/non-ST with education or wealth group. We used a 4-way decomposition to estimate whether these MDD-W inequalities were affected by social group differences in intervention participation rates (mediation only), participation benefits (interaction only), or both combined (mediated interaction).
resultsIntervention participation and MDD-W were greater among the more advantaged groups of non-ST, higher education, or higher wealth. Often, the more disadvantaged groups had greater participation benefits (interaction only), which narrowed MDD-W inequalities. However, intersectional groups with 2 disadvantaged characteristics (e.g., poorer ST) had smaller participation benefits than those with 1 disadvantaged characteristic (e.g., wealthier ST), which widened MDD-W inequalities. Differences in participation rates had negligible effects on MDD-W inequalities. Often, any marginal widening of MDD-W inequalities due to disadvantaged groups participating less (mediation only) was suppressed by their greater participation benefits (mediated interaction).
conclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first intersectionality-informed analysis of nutrition interventions. UPAVAN interventions mostly had equitable impacts, reducing several inequalities in maternal diet quality. We demonstrate how intersectionality-informed analyses can help identify inequities in nutrition interventions and inform the design of inclusive interventions that reach and benefit the most marginalized 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.