indian council of medical research - Pondicherry University DSpace ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(i) Work The daily actlvlty pattern between gtrls and boys In the age group 5-15 years was compared only In those who were studylng In school Slnw there were only 3 boys who were not In school In that age group, ~t was not poss~ble to compare In chlldren who were not studylng In the older age group (16-20 years), the companson was made only among those who were not studying Since there was only one girl In that age group who was studylng. ~t was not poss~ble to compare In chlldren who were study~ng For g~rls, the mean work load Increased from about 0 9 hourslday between 5-10 years of age, to about 6 hounlday beyond 10 years of age However, in those who were golng to school (between 11-15 years). ~t was about 2 3 hourslday In boys, ~t Increased from about 0 5 hourslday In the 5-10 year age group, to about 4 1 hourslday In the 16-20 year age group whlch was the maxlmum Although the mean work load was h~gher In girls In all the age groups, ~t was found to be statlstlcally s~gnlficant only among those who were studylng, In the age group 11-15 years (p c 0 05) However, there was a d~fference In the work pattern as shown In Figures 7.3 A-7.4 C For g~rls, housework compnsed more than 44 0 Oh of thelr work load In all age groups, the maxlmum (65 4%) being recorded between 5-10 years The proportion of thelr total work load In Income generatlng work, Increased from about 2 0 % In the younger age group to about 40 0 % ln the older age group The outs~de work burden (as % of thelr total work load) decreased from 32 6% lo 12 1% w~th lncreaslng age For boys, ~t was observed, that the Important component of the11 work load (64 3%) was dolng outs~de work ~n the younger age group (5-9 years) and In Income generatlng work (78 0%) In the older age group (16-20 years) Boys were also observed to do
housework Between 5-15 years, about 7 0%-12 0% of thelr total work burden was spent In housework This propofi~on reduced to 2 0% In the age group 1620 years (11) Study In the age group 5-10 years no slgn~flcant dlfference was observed between girls and boys In the average tlme spent In stud~es (0 7hourslday vs 1 hourlday respectively for g~rls and boys, p > 0 05) On the other hand, between 11-15 years, although g~ris dld more work than boys (2 3hourslday for g~rls, vs 1 3 hourslday for boys), they also spent on an average 2 3 hourslday on stud~es as compared to 1 3 hourslday by boys whlch was s~gn~ftcantly h~gher (p < 0 05) (111) Leisure The average tlme for le~sure and play ranged from 3 3 hourslday to 6 2 hourslday for g~rls and 4 0 hourslday to 6 2 hourslday for boys The maxlmum lelsure was between 5 10 years of age No stgnlflcant dlfference was observed between the genders In the t~me ava~lable for lelsure except In the school golng chtldren In the age group 11-15 years where boys had s~gn~ftcantly more lelsure (p < 0 05) (IV) Skep It was observed that In the study group, both gtrls and boys had adequate sleep ranglng from about 8-10 hourslday (p > 0 05) 7.4.6 Influence of menarche on the status of the girl child la) Ethnoqraohic methods Out of the 160 respondents to the structured questlonnalre, almost all of them (99 4%) felt that a glri could cont~nue w~th her schooling after menarche Though menarche dld
Page 1 and 2:
A Case Study of the Health, Educati
Page 3 and 4:
ACKNOWLEDGMENT "No man is an island
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS CHAPTER PAQE No. I. INTROD
Page 7 and 8:
INTRODUCTION The children of today
Page 9 and 10:
phase, there is maximum educational
Page 11 and 12:
Apart from the health and education
Page 13 and 14:
Jims Jnd Objectives
Page 15 and 16:
(c) To study the diet pattern of ch
Page 17 and 18:
OVERVIEW OF STUDY DESIGN This chapt
Page 19 and 20:
3.2 Definltlon of age group for the
Page 21 and 22:
(11) Pedlatrlcs Inpatlent ward => O
Page 27 and 28:
- Study Qrea Qnd Demography
Page 29 and 30:
4.22 Itrfreslructun, The village is
Page 31 and 32:
and India, is given in Table 4.1. O
Page 35 and 36:
TABLE 4.1 AGE AND GENDER SPECIFlC D
Page 37 and 38:
TABLE 4.4 DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLD
Page 39:
Distributlon of adult village popul
Page 43 and 44:
HEALTH STATUS OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDRE
Page 45 and 46:
of chronic illnesses in children le
Page 47 and 48:
Bhasin et a1..1990; Gupta et a1..19
Page 49 and 50:
eported by ttie School Heallh Cell,
Page 51 and 52:
lb) Anemia (i) Global scenario Nutr
Page 53 and 54:
serum vitamin A; iii) ophthalmologi
Page 55 and 56:
and elimination of iodine deficienc
Page 57 and 58:
in 15.7% of the children screened (
Page 59 and 60:
3 Strives to prov~de a healthy envi
Page 61 and 62:
nght attitudes and practices. In or
Page 63 and 64:
her schooling (XI1 standard) and wa
Page 65 and 66:
(iii) Nonparticipant observation No
Page 67 and 68:
The height and weight of the chlldr
Page 69 and 70:
5 3.2 Organization of date and anal
Page 71 and 72:
eflection of the lower enrollment r
Page 73 and 74:
ecommended and the actual intake of
Page 75 and 76:
(11) Causes Change of water cold fo
Page 77 and 78:
The mean duration of fever was 3.6(
Page 79 and 80:
annual ~nc~dence being 6211,000 chi
Page 81 and 82:
were all unanimous In saying that t
Page 83 and 84:
chlldren from socioeconomically bac
Page 85 and 86:
Le generally lower than the values
Page 87 and 88:
health problem in school age childr
Page 89 and 90:
p91d tltero is widespread use of io
Page 91 and 92:
worms spontaneously formed In the s
Page 93:
MORBIDITY PATTERN m S= S Year oi pu
Page 97 and 98:
1ABLE 5.3 PREVALENCE OF VITAMIN A D
Page 99 and 100:
I'HKVAl.H.NC'lr. O W ItIIIIIIMA I I
Page 101 and 102:
METHODS OF SNDY USED FOR DIFFERENT
Page 103 and 104:
TABLE 5.8 B ISSUES ADDRESSED BY DWF
Page 105 and 106:
TABLE 5.8 B (continued) ISSUES ADDR
Page 107 and 108:
TABLE 5.10 A COMPARISON OF MEAN INT
Page 109 and 110:
TABLE 5.10 C COMPARISON OF MEAN INT
Page 111 and 112:
COMPARISON OF MEAN INTAKE OF THIAMI
Page 113 and 114:
COMPARlSON OF MEAN INTAKE OF PROTEI
Page 115 and 116:
TABLE 5.11D COMPARISON OF MEAN INTA
Page 119 and 120:
TABLE 5.13 PHKVALLNC'R OF UIFQEUEN'
Page 121:
TABLE 5.15 COMPARISON OF PREVALENCE
Page 124 and 125:
TABLE 5.19 PREVALENCE OF NUTRITIONA
Page 126 and 127:
TABLE 5.22 PREVALENCE OF %FECTIOUS
Page 128 and 129:
TABLE 5.23 (continued) COMPARISON O
Page 130 and 131:
TABLE 5.25 ANNUAL INCIDENCE OF DlFF
Page 132 and 133:
TABLE 5.28 ( OMPARISON OF SPEC'IRII
Page 134 and 135:
TABLE 5.29 COMPARISON OF REPORTED S
Page 140 and 141:
TABLE 5.33 BY THE PARAMEDICAI. WORK
Page 142 and 143:
FIGURE 5.2 Comparison of age and ge
Page 144 and 145:
FIGURE 5.5 Monthly variation in the
Page 146 and 147:
FIGURE 5.6 Comparlson of age specif
Page 148 and 149:
FIGURE 5.10 Age specific body mass
Page 150:
FIGURE 5.14 Prevalence of important
Page 157 and 158:
EDUCATION STATUS OF SCHOOL AGE CHIL
Page 159 and 160:
6.2.2 Indian Scenario (8) Literact
Page 161 and 162:
32.5% for girls and 15.9% for boys
Page 163 and 164:
summary tables givlng details of th
Page 165 and 166:
namely school records and census It
Page 167 and 168:
school butldlng should be better Th
Page 169 and 170:
(iii) Proportion of children in the
Page 171 and 172:
8, "During groundnut picking season
Page 173 and 174:
6.4.3 Dropout @) Maanitude and ~att
Page 175 and 176:
C, Case Studies Case N0.l Dhanalaks
Page 177 and 178:
,haracter of ch~ldren and help them
Page 179 and 180:
Researchers have not been able to c
Page 181 and 182:
allage, local fesbvals and funct~on
Page 183 and 184: TABLE 6.3 PERCENTAGE OF GIRLS REACH
Page 185 and 186: TABLE 6.4 (continued) ('OMPAHISON O
Page 187 and 188: I TABLE 6.5 A (continued) ' USED FO
Page 189 and 190: 1 TABLE 6.5 B (continued) ISSUES AD
Page 191 and 192: TABLE 6.8 ('OMPARISON OP CAUSKS OF
Page 193 and 194: TABLE 6.10 COMPARISON OF CAUSES OF
Page 195 and 196: TABLE 6.12 COMPARISON OF CAllSES OF
Page 197 and 198: FIGURE 6.1 Literacy rates in female
Page 199 and 200: FIGURE 6.3 Comparison of age and ge
Page 201 and 202: FIGURE 6.5 Comparison of proportion
Page 203 and 204: FIGURE 6.7 Dropout pattern in glrls
Page 210 and 211: SOCIAL STATUS OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDRE
Page 212 and 213: tremendous Increase in the enrollme
Page 214 and 215: children had lower contact rates th
Page 216 and 217: female ch~ldren showed that between
Page 218 and 219: was felt that more information coul
Page 220 and 221: detalls of the~r actlv~ties In the
Page 222 and 223: sectlon For each Issue, the observa
Page 224 and 225: "eglected the smaller of the twlns
Page 226 and 227: many (53 1%) preferred to take them
Page 228 and 229: (11) Data from tertiary care hospit
Page 230 and 231: so However, some (22 5O/0) were w~l
Page 232 and 233: (i~) Cohort 3 In the cohort, 54 out
Page 236 and 237: not interfere with a girl's educati
Page 238 and 239: The following are some of the state
Page 240 and 241: was collected from 99 familles The
Page 242 and 243: on the Issue of school age g~rls (U
Page 244 and 245: een found that in some parts of the
Page 246 and 247: 48 0% In glrls and 52 0% In boys Th
Page 248 and 249: as an excuse to stop thelr girls fr
Page 250 and 251: stud~es compared to boys, although
Page 252 and 253: TABLE 7.1 A METHOD OF STUDY USED FO
Page 254 and 255: I TABLE 7.1 A (continued) METHOD OF
Page 256 and 257: TABLE 7.1 B(conthued) \IPllIOIfi I
Page 258 and 259: TABLE 7.1 B(coatlnued) ISSUES ADDRE
Page 260 and 261: TABLE 7.2 A RELATIVE DISTRlBUTION O
Page 262 and 263: TABLE 7.3 COMPARISON OF TIME INTERV
Page 264 and 265: TABLE 7.6 COMPARISON OF DAILY ACTIV
Page 266 and 267: TABLE 7.8 COMPARISON OF COST ALLOCA
Page 268 and 269: TABLE 7.10 ( O~~PARISON OF ANNUAL c
Page 270 and 271: TABLE 7.12 A COMPARISON OF ANNUAL R
Page 272 and 273: FIGURE 7.1 Distribution of daily ac
Page 274 and 275: FIGURE 7.3 Distribution of work pat
Page 279 and 280: Summary And Concliusions
Page 281 and 282: data for certaln Issues were obtaln
Page 283 and 284: (ii) Other epidemiological methods
Page 285 and 286:
VHN and PHC records I. The records
Page 287 and 288:
expected the school to do everyth~n
Page 289 and 290:
stopplng from school They felt that
Page 291 and 292:
jc) Health care and the air1 child
Page 293 and 294:
Data from Government Chest Clinic,
Page 295 and 296:
hlgher than In boys, the difference
Page 297 and 298:
(lv) Cost of household consumption
Page 300 and 301:
RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the flndln
Page 302 and 303:
9.4 Recommondatins for future resea
Page 304 and 305:
BIBLIOGRAPHY Ayit~wnl, V K . Agntwo
Page 306 and 307:
Bamji. M.S.. Sarma. R.K.V.. Radhaia
Page 308 and 309:
Bundy, D.A.P., Guyatt, H.L. (1996).
Page 310 and 311:
Ghildiyal. R., Desai. B.N.. Joshi.
Page 312 and 313:
Kapoor, G., Aneja, S. (1992). Nutri
Page 314 and 315:
Nagoba. B.S.. Basutkar, S.H.. Bhat.
Page 316 and 317:
Ramakrlshnan, R.. Rao. T.V . Prasad
Page 318 and 319:
Sharma, R.G., Mishra. Y.C., Vennal,
Page 320 and 321:
Umeh. R.E.. Chijloke, C.P.. Okonkwo
Page 323:
* Not to be Rlled In the fleld " Co
Page 327 and 328:
School children-Girl Chlld S.A Form
Page 329 and 330:
School children Girl child S.A ID.
Page 331 and 332:
Form to be filled up during follow
Page 333 and 334:
h. I'arliril,nlio~~ ill 1111usrhol
Page 335:
.%A / WirJa 11. as! tad uq.& ~a .WA
Page 343:
6. jlb na,/J s- Sr .?ud;~O3unmn~t 0
show all

indian council of medical research - Pondicherry University DSpace ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?