OBJECTIVE: The systematic design of a food-based strategy to improve the dietary diversity of children in rural farming communities in Uganda.
METHODS: The intervention mapping protocol was used to provide a systematic approach to developing theory-based and evidence-based intervention methods and strategy.
RESULTS: The priority behavioral and environmental determinants identified were related to food production, consumption, and efficacy while the personal determinants focused on knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, attitude, and outcome expectations. The aim of the resulting strategy was set to improve the availability, accessibility, and consumption of diverse foods, with a particular focus on production diversity, production practices, market access, and market diversity. Behaviour change methods were selected to enhance ability and self-efficacy, strategic goal setting, and provision of feedback. The strategy focused on household groups for learning, demonstration, practice, and social support. The validation showed that the determinants and actors incorporated in the strategy were important and relevant for improving the productivity, food availability, dietary diversity, livelihoods, and health of rural farming households and communities.
CONCLUSION: Application of the protocol yielded a contextualized food-based strategy that can be adjusted for use in other smallholder contexts in developing countries by piloting implementation plans based on the strategy; reassessing the key determinants and implementing the revised strategy; or replicating the whole design process.
METHODS: In this longitudinal study, we randomly selected community members aged between 18 and 70 years who resided in Segamat district of Johor state, Malaysia. Over 21 days, we conducted three home visits to each participant. During each visit, participants completed a questionnaire consisting of Likert scale, multiple choice, and free text questions and we collected quantitative and qualitative data. These inquiries assessed the participants' perception of heat as health threat, whether or not they took heat preventive measures, and the specific protective measures they routinely employed. Descriptive data analyses were conducted and patterns of protective measures were investigated.
FINDINGS: Between March 29 and July 31, 2023, 120 participants (72 women and 48 men) completed 360 questionnaires over three home visits. Initially, 58% participants recognised heat hazards to daily activities, decreasing to 42% and 35% by visits 2 and 3. Participants took preventive measures throughout the day, which was consistently high between 1200 h and 1400 h, with 77% of participants taking preventive measures on visit 1, 82% on visit 2, and 82% on visit 3. Use of preventive measures was also high between 1400 h and 1730 h, with 77% using preventive measure on visit 1, 81% on visit 2, and 79% on visit 3. The most common protective measures were fans (used by 68-88% of participants), drinking more water (70-78% of participants), and resting (44-72% of participants). The least common were relocating to cooler places, removing clothes, and using wet towels (0-2·5%). Despite high temperatures, perceptions of heat risks decreased over time. Participants took basic protections, especially at midday, but improved literacy and affordable cooling options are needed to protect vulnerable rural populations.
INTERPRETATION: Our findings underline the need to improve heat literacy and adaptation as only half of the population assessed perceived heat as a potential health hazard and practised limited heat protective measures. Addressing climate change and health necessitates fundamental behavioural changes on the part of individuals and communities, to protect them against the adverse effects of heat.
FUNDING: Monash University Malaysia and Heidelberg Institute of Global Health, Heidelberg University.
METHODS: The South East Asia Community Observatory (SEACO) is a dynamic prospective community cohort. We contacted a random sample of 1007 adults (18+) who had previously provided PA data in 2018. We asked about PA during the MCO (March-May 2020) and at the time of interview (June 2020).
RESULTS: During the MCO, PA reduced by a mean of 6.7 hours/week (95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.3, 8.0) compared to 2018, with the largest reductions among those in employment. By June, PA was 3.4 hours/week (95% CI = 2.0, 4.8) less than 2018, leaving 34% of adults currently inactive (20% in 2018). Reductions in occupational PA were not replaced with active travel or activity at home. Despite these observed reductions, most participants did not think the MCO had affected their PA.
CONCLUSIONS: Movement restrictions are associated with lower PA lasting beyond the period of strict restrictions; such longer-term reductions in PA may have a detrimental impact on health. Future MCOs should encourage people to be active, but may additionally need targeted messaging for those who don't necessarily realise they are at risk. In particular, policies developed in more affluent countries may not easily translate to LMICs.