Women and evaluation of inequalities in the distribution of risk factors for Chronic non-communicable diseases (NCD), Vigitel 2016-2017

To compare the distribution of chronic non-communicable diseases (CNCD) indicators among adult female beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família Program (BFP) in Brazilian capitals. Analysis of Vigitel telephone survey data in 2016 and 2017. Gross and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Revista brasileira de epidemiologia 2020, Vol.23, p.e200058-e200058
Hauptverfasser: Malta, Deborah Carvalho, Bernal, Regina Tomie Ivata, Carvalho, Quéren Hapuque de, Pell, Jill P, Dundas, Ruth, Leyland, Alastair, Vasconcelos, Leda Lúcia Couto de, Cardoso, Lais Santos de Magalhaes, Stopa, Sheila Rizzato, Barreto, Mauricio Lima
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; por
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To compare the distribution of chronic non-communicable diseases (CNCD) indicators among adult female beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família Program (BFP) in Brazilian capitals. Analysis of Vigitel telephone survey data in 2016 and 2017. Gross and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) and their respective confidence intervals were estimated using Poisson Regression model. Women with BF have lower schooling, are young people, live more frequently in the Northeast and North of the country. Higher prevalence of risk factors were found in woman receiving BF. The adjusted PR of the BF women were: smokers (PR = 1.98), overweight (PR = 1.21), obesity (PR = 1.63), fruits and vegetables (PR = 0.63), consumption of soft drinks (PR = 1.68), bean consumption (PR = 1.25), physical activity at leisure (PR = 0.65), physical activity at home (PR = 1.35), time watching TV (PR = 1.37), self-assessment of poor health status (PR =2.04), mammography (PR = 0.86), Pap smears (PR = 0.91), hypertension (PR = 1.46) and diabetes (PR = 1,66). When women were compared among strata of the same schooling, these differences were reduced. Worst indicators among women receiving BF reflect social inequalities inherent in this most vulnerable group. The study also shows that BF is being targeted at the most vulnerable women.
ISSN:1415-790X
1980-5497
DOI:10.1590/1980-549720200058