14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Progress on Sustainable Development Goal indicators in 707 districts of India: a quantitative mid-line assessment using the National Family Health Surveys, 2016 and 2021

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          India has committed itself to accomplishing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. Meeting these goals would require prioritizing and targeting specific areas within India. We provide a mid-line assessment of the progress across 707 districts of India for 33 SDG indicators related to health and social determinants of health.

          Methods

          We used data collected on children and adults from two rounds of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) conducted in 2016 and 2021. We identified 33 indicators that cover 9 of the 17 official SDGs. We used the goals and targets outlined by the Global Indicator Framework, Government of India and World Health Organization (WHO) to determine SDG targets to be met by 2030. Using precision-weighted multilevel models, we estimated district mean for 2016 and 2021, and using these values, computed the Annual Absolute Change (AAC) for each indicator. Using the AAC and targets, we classified India and each district as: Achieved-I, Achieved-II, On-Target and Off-Target. Further, when a district was Off-Target on a given indicator, we further identified the calendar year in which the target will be met post-2030.

          Findings

          India is not On-Target for 19 of the 33 SDGs indicators. The critical Off-Target indicators include Access to Basic Services, Wasting and Overweight Children, Anaemia, Child Marriage, Partner Violence, Tobacco Use, and Modern Contraceptive Use. For these indicators, more than 75% of the districts were Off-Target. Because of a worsening trend observed between 2016 and 2021, and assuming no course correction occurs, many districts will never meet the targets on the SDGs even well after 2030. These Off-Target districts are concentrated in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Bihar, and Odisha. Finally, it does not appear that Aspirational Districts, on average, are performing better in meeting the SDG targets than other districts on majority of the indicators.

          Interpretation

          A mid-line assessment of districts' progress on SDGs suggests an urgent need to increase the pace and momentum on four SDG goals: No Poverty (SDG 1), Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Good Health and Well-Being (SDG 3) and Gender Equality (SDG 5). Developing a strategic roadmap at this time will help India ensure success with regards to meeting the SDGs. India's emergence and sustenance as a leading economic power depends on meeting some of the more basic health and social determinants of health-related SDGs in an immediate and equitable manner.

          Funding

          This work was funded by the doi 10.13039/100000865, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; , INV-002992.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Demographic and health surveys: a profile.

          Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) are comparable nationally representative household surveys that have been conducted in more than 85 countries worldwide since 1984. The DHS were initially designed to expand on demographic, fertility and family planning data collected in the World Fertility Surveys and Contraceptive Prevalence Surveys, and continue to provide an important resource for the monitoring of vital statistics and population health indicators in low- and middle-income countries. The DHS collect a wide range of objective and self-reported data with a strong focus on indicators of fertility, reproductive health, maternal and child health, mortality, nutrition and self-reported health behaviours among adults. Key advantages of the DHS include high response rates, national coverage, high quality interviewer training, standardized data collection procedures across countries and consistent content over time, allowing comparability across populations cross-sectionally and over time. Data from DHS facilitate epidemiological research focused on monitoring of prevalence, trends and inequalities. A variety of robust observational data analysis methods have been used, including cross-sectional designs, repeated cross-sectional designs, spatial and multilevel analyses, intra-household designs and cross-comparative analyses. In this profile, we present an overview of the DHS along with an introduction to the potential scope for these data in contributing to the field of micro- and macro-epidemiology. DHS datasets are available for researchers through MEASURE DHS at www.measuredhs.com.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Measuring progress from 1990 to 2017 and projecting attainment to 2030 of the health-related Sustainable Development Goals for 195 countries and territories: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

            Summary Background Efforts to establish the 2015 baseline and monitor early implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) highlight both great potential for and threats to improving health by 2030. To fully deliver on the SDG aim of “leaving no one behind”, it is increasingly important to examine the health-related SDGs beyond national-level estimates. As part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 (GBD 2017), we measured progress on 41 of 52 health-related SDG indicators and estimated the health-related SDG index for 195 countries and territories for the period 1990–2017, projected indicators to 2030, and analysed global attainment. Methods We measured progress on 41 health-related SDG indicators from 1990 to 2017, an increase of four indicators since GBD 2016 (new indicators were health worker density, sexual violence by non-intimate partners, population census status, and prevalence of physical and sexual violence [reported separately]). We also improved the measurement of several previously reported indicators. We constructed national-level estimates and, for a subset of health-related SDGs, examined indicator-level differences by sex and Socio-demographic Index (SDI) quintile. We also did subnational assessments of performance for selected countries. To construct the health-related SDG index, we transformed the value for each indicator on a scale of 0–100, with 0 as the 2·5th percentile and 100 as the 97·5th percentile of 1000 draws calculated from 1990 to 2030, and took the geometric mean of the scaled indicators by target. To generate projections through 2030, we used a forecasting framework that drew estimates from the broader GBD study and used weighted averages of indicator-specific and country-specific annualised rates of change from 1990 to 2017 to inform future estimates. We assessed attainment of indicators with defined targets in two ways: first, using mean values projected for 2030, and then using the probability of attainment in 2030 calculated from 1000 draws. We also did a global attainment analysis of the feasibility of attaining SDG targets on the basis of past trends. Using 2015 global averages of indicators with defined SDG targets, we calculated the global annualised rates of change required from 2015 to 2030 to meet these targets, and then identified in what percentiles the required global annualised rates of change fell in the distribution of country-level rates of change from 1990 to 2015. We took the mean of these global percentile values across indicators and applied the past rate of change at this mean global percentile to all health-related SDG indicators, irrespective of target definition, to estimate the equivalent 2030 global average value and percentage change from 2015 to 2030 for each indicator. Findings The global median health-related SDG index in 2017 was 59·4 (IQR 35·4–67·3), ranging from a low of 11·6 (95% uncertainty interval 9·6–14·0) to a high of 84·9 (83·1–86·7). SDG index values in countries assessed at the subnational level varied substantially, particularly in China and India, although scores in Japan and the UK were more homogeneous. Indicators also varied by SDI quintile and sex, with males having worse outcomes than females for non-communicable disease (NCD) mortality, alcohol use, and smoking, among others. Most countries were projected to have a higher health-related SDG index in 2030 than in 2017, while country-level probabilities of attainment by 2030 varied widely by indicator. Under-5 mortality, neonatal mortality, maternal mortality ratio, and malaria indicators had the most countries with at least 95% probability of target attainment. Other indicators, including NCD mortality and suicide mortality, had no countries projected to meet corresponding SDG targets on the basis of projected mean values for 2030 but showed some probability of attainment by 2030. For some indicators, including child malnutrition, several infectious diseases, and most violence measures, the annualised rates of change required to meet SDG targets far exceeded the pace of progress achieved by any country in the recent past. We found that applying the mean global annualised rate of change to indicators without defined targets would equate to about 19% and 22% reductions in global smoking and alcohol consumption, respectively; a 47% decline in adolescent birth rates; and a more than 85% increase in health worker density per 1000 population by 2030. Interpretation The GBD study offers a unique, robust platform for monitoring the health-related SDGs across demographic and geographic dimensions. Our findings underscore the importance of increased collection and analysis of disaggregated data and highlight where more deliberate design or targeting of interventions could accelerate progress in attaining the SDGs. Current projections show that many health-related SDG indicators, NCDs, NCD-related risks, and violence-related indicators will require a concerted shift away from what might have driven past gains—curative interventions in the case of NCDs—towards multisectoral, prevention-oriented policy action and investments to achieve SDG aims. Notably, several targets, if they are to be met by 2030, demand a pace of progress that no country has achieved in the recent past. The future is fundamentally uncertain, and no model can fully predict what breakthroughs or events might alter the course of the SDGs. What is clear is that our actions—or inaction—today will ultimately dictate how close the world, collectively, can get to leaving no one behind by 2030. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Association of maternal height with child mortality, anthropometric failure, and anemia in India.

              Prior research on the determinants of child health has focused on contemporaneous risk factors such as maternal behaviors, dietary factors, and immediate environmental conditions. Research on intergenerational factors that might also predispose a child to increased health adversity remains limited. To examine the association between maternal height and child mortality, anthropometric failure, and anemia. We retrieved data from the 2005-2006 National Family Health Survey in India (released in 2008). The study population constitutes a nationally representative cross-sectional sample of singleton children aged 0 to 59 months and born after January 2000 or January 2001 (n = 50 750) to mothers aged 15 to 49 years from all 29 states of India. Information on children was obtained by a face-to-face interview with mothers, with a response rate of 94.5%. Height was measured with an adjustable measuring board calibrated in millimeters. Demographic and socioeconomic variables were considered as covariates. Modified Poisson regression models that account for multistage survey design and sampling weights were estimated. Mortality was the primary end point; underweight, stunting, wasting, and anemia were included as secondary outcomes. In adjusted models, a 1-cm increase in maternal height was associated with a decreased risk of child mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.978; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.970-0.987; P < .001), underweight (RR, 0.971; 95% CI, 0.968-0.974; P < .001), stunting (RR, 0.971; 95% CI, 0.968-0.0973; P < .001), wasting (RR, 0.989; 95% CI, 0.984-0.994; P < .001), and anemia (RR, 0.998; 95% CI, 0.997-0.999; P = .02). Children born to mothers who were less than 145 cm in height were 1.71 times more likely to die (95% CI, 1.37-2.13) (absolute probability, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.07-0.12) compared with mothers who were at least 160 cm in height (absolute probability, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.04-0.07). Similar patterns were observed for anthropometric failure related to underweight and stunting. Paternal height was not associated with child mortality or anemia but was associated with child anthropometric failure. In a nationally representative sample of households in India, maternal height was inversely associated with child mortality and anthropometric failure.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia
                Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia
                The Lancet Regional Health - Southeast Asia
                Elsevier
                2772-3682
                2772-3682
                21 February 2023
                June 2023
                21 February 2023
                : 13
                : 100155
                Affiliations
                [a ]Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Cambridge, MA, USA
                [b ]Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
                [c ]Laxmi Mittal and Family South Asia Institute-India Office, New Delhi, India
                [d ]Center for Geographic Analysis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
                [e ]Interdisciplinary Program in Precision Public Health, Department of Public Health Sciences, Graduate School of Korea University, Seoul, South Korea
                [f ]Institute of Economic Growth, New Delhi, India
                [g ]Department of Economics, FLAME University, Pune, India
                [h ]Division of Health Policy and Management, College of Health Science, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. svsubram@ 123456hsph.harvard.edu
                Article
                S2772-3682(23)00015-X 100155
                10.1016/j.lansea.2023.100155
                10306006
                37383562
                827f65bf-2320-40d7-bb0d-a02499c64605
                © 2023 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 23 June 2022
                : 11 January 2023
                : 13 January 2023
                Categories
                Articles

                sustainable development goals (sdgs),social determinants of health (sdh),indicators,population health,gender equality,nutrition,aspirational districts,policy,monitoring and evaluation,india

                Comments

                Comment on this article