Low dietary diversity and its influencing factors among a San group in Namibia

BMC Research Notes

Table 1 Characteristics of the total sample (n = 200) and DDS by gender in BNP East, Namibia

	Total			Women (n = 111)			Men (n = 89)			P^#
	n	DDS^a	SD	n	DDS^a	SD	N	DDS^a	SD
Age
18–49	144	2.5	0.72	82	2.46	0.757	62	2.55	0.67	0.377
50+	56	2.27	0.78	29	2.38	0.82	27	2.15	0.662	0.278
Education level
No education	64	2.20*	0.74	39	2.28	0.826	25	2.08	0.572	0.356
Low (Grade 1–7)	78	2.55	0.73	50	2.5	0.735	28	2.64	0.731	0.344
High (Grade 8+)	58	2.53	0.68	22	2.59	0.734	36	2.5	0.655	0.787
Employment
Employed	22	2.18	0.79	8	2.13	0.991	14	2.21	0.699	0.856
Unemployed	178	2.47	0.72	103	2.47	0.752	75	2.47	0.684	0.630
Income^b
Very low (US$ 0–1.9/day)	148	2.43	0.73	82	2.48	0.789	66	2.38	0.651	0.681
Low (US$ 1.9–3.8/day)	35	2.37	0.81	21	2.29	0.784	14	2.5	0.855	0.523
Medium (US$ 3.8/day+)	17	2.59	0.62	8	2.5	0.535	9	2.67	0.707	0.666
Agricultural field^c
Yes	78	2.35	0.75	40	2.25	0.742	38	2.45	0.76	0.238
No	122	2.49	0.72	71	2.55	0771	51	2.41	0.638	0.431
Livestock^d
Yes	91	2.45	0.75	50	2.42	0.785	41	2.49	0.711	0.499
No	109	2.42	0.73	61	2.46	0.765	48	2.38	0.672	0.619

^#P values for the comparison of men and women, calculated using Mann–Whitney U tests. Significant if P < 0.05
*Post-hoc test reveals that the mean DDS of the ‘no education’ subgroup differs significantly from the other two subgroups in the total sample
^aData is presented as means of DDS
^bParticipants were classified into three groups based on monthly household income (very low, low, and medium) using the purchasing power parity equivalent of the World Bank’s poverty ratio of US$1.9 a day per individual
^cAccess to agricultural fields
^dAccess to livestock: goats and chickens

ISSN: 1756-0500