Search

Sustaining large-scale and good-quality food fortification requires strategies that incentivize food processors to invest in and consistently meet national food fortification standards where they exist. A standardized Micronutrient Fortification Index (MFI) piloted in Nigeria has provided a ranking of fortified branded products for each participating company, based on a score aggregating the effectiveness and efficiency of the company's systems and levels of product fortification. The MFI has demonstrated the significance of brands as a focal point for investment and industry accountability in food fortification and the power of harnessing the competitive nature of businesses to drive their food fortification performance. The initiative started with a pilot consisting of well-known brands of 4 companies and has since expanded participation to 15 companies, representing 31 brands, having completed the first entire ranking cycle. The publicly listed brands on the Index now cover approximately 80% of the flour milling market, 40% of the edible oils market, and 88% of the sugar market in Nigeria, reaching an estimated 134 million people in the country in 2022 according to analysis by TechnoServe Supporting African Processors of Fortified Foods (SAPFF) program in Nigeria. The data inputs are made through company-owned digital portals, and the results are published on a secure, web-based public portal which also serves as a gateway for stakeholders to access related information on micronutrient fortification and food quality (https://technoserve-mfi.web.app/). The ultimate aim of the MFI is to serve as a leverage for private sector efforts to both digitalize quality assurance and business processes linked to industrial automation and to harness their competitiveness through voluntary participation in the Index to drive improved food fortification performance based on industry best practices and quality benchmarks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Although the potential impact of food fortification to improve the micronutrient status of populations has been demonstrated beyond a doubt, it is constrained in practice by critical gaps in program design and implementation. These are partly linked to suboptimal decision making. Objectives We aimed to demonstrate how the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework for health system and public health decisions can be applied to formulate recommendations and make decisions in national food fortification programming. Methods Following a program impact pathway, we reviewed the literature to define the key decision types and identify the corresponding decision makers necessary for designing and implementing effective food fortification programs. We then applied the GRADE EtD framework to the Nigerian fortification program to illustrate how evidence-informed assessments and conclusions can be made. Results Fortification program decisions were classified into 5 types: 1) program initiation; 2) program design; 3) program delivery; 4) program impact; and 5) program continuation. Policymakers, food processors, and (in cases dependent on or considering external funding) development partners are the main decision makers in a fortification program, whereas technical partners play important roles in translating evidence into contextualized recommendations. The availability and certainty of evidence for fortification programs are often low (e.g. quality and coverage data are not routinely collected and there are challenges evaluating impact in such population-based programs using randomized controlled trials) yet decisions must still be made, underscoring the importance of using available evidence. Furthermore, when making program initiation and continuation decisions, coordination with overlapping micronutrient interventions is needed where they coexist. Conclusions This framework is a practical tool to strengthen decision-making processes in fortification programs. Using evidence in a systematic and transparent way for decision making can improve fortification program design, delivery, and ultimately health impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advocacy organizations have played a significant role in the field of nutrition in recent years. However, why are some advocates viewed as more effective than others? This paper derives metrics for assessing advocacy efficacy by first drawing on key insights from the nutrition and public policy scholarship. A set of metrics is proposed to capture the constitutive elements of three concepts that often emerge as critical from that literature: organizational capacity, strong networks and external outreach. Based on a survey of 66 nutrition stakeholders in Nigeria, including at the federal level and within the states of Kaduna and Kano, the metrics are then applied to a set of advocacy organizations within the country. We show that the metrics can provide insights into why some advocacy organizations are perceived as more effective than others by policymakers. Specifically, we find that geographical reach, the share of budget allocated to advocacy, action plans with clear objectives, large networks that include government and non-governmental policy champions, multiple media and dissemination outputs and numerous training events collectively increase nutrition advocates' visibility to, and influence on, policymakers. Although the metrics are subject to further testing in other country settings and need to be interpreted based on a country's underlying policy system, they offer a useful starting point for more systematic, comparative advocacy analysis and learning within the nutrition field and beyond., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press in association with The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.)

Background: Anaemia in pregnancy is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcome. Unfortunately, in developing countries its prevalence has continued to rise. To improve the situation, iron supplement is routinely prescribed during pregnancy. We therefore examine the impact of the intervention as being currently practised in our clinical setting., Methods: In total, 255 prenatal clinic attendees who had more than 8 weeks of prescribed iron supplements were sampled. Data was obtained on their socio-demographic features, haemoglobin concentration at booking, compliance with iron supplements and third trimester haemoglobin value., Results: Observed iron supplementation compliance rate was 184(72.2%). There was a significant drop in mean haemoglobin (Hb) concentration between the two time points (booking Hb: 32.56±2.99; third trimester Hb: 31.67±3.01; mean diff: 0.89±3.04; t = 4.673; 95% CI= 0.52-1.27; p= <0.001). Anaemia increased from 132(51.8%) to 150(58.8%) by the third trimester. Increase in anaemia occurred in both iron-compliant and non-compliant groups. Non-compliance however had higher odds of predicting anaemia by the third trimester (OR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.03-3.26; p: 0.04)., Conclusion: Although iron supplementation is still a good intervention in developing countries, it is not sufficient to reduce overall prevalence of anaemia by the third trimester. There is a need to look beyond the approach and reinforce the importance of better feeding practices, food fortification and reduced frequency of pregnancies.