BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM
Nutritional status is defined as the evident state of nutrition of an individual (Latidan, 2003). According to him, a person is said to have a good nutritional status if he shows no evidence of malnutrition, whether open or latent. He then defined nutrition as the aspect of science that explain the relationship of food to the functioning of living organisms which includes the intake of food, liberation of energy, elimination of wastes and the biochemical synthesis that are essential for maintenance of normal growth and development (Laditan, 2003). He also said that nutritional status of any person is his/her health as dictated by the quality of nutrients consumed, and the body’s ability to utilize them for its metabolic needs. Thus, being nutritionally vulnerable, under-5 children’s nutrition is generally accepted as an indicator of the nutritional status of any particular community (Davidson, 1995). This is due to their easy susceptibility to malnutrition and infections (Akinlosotu & Hussain, 1985; Uppal, 2005). According o them, children in this age group require a high supply of nutrients since they are usually very active and their growth is rapid. It has been estimated that approximately one out of every three Under-5 children is chronically malnourished and thereby subjected to a pattern of ill health and poor development in early life (UNICEF, 1998), with malnutrition being associated with more than half of all deaths of children worldwide (Sobo & Oguntona, 2006). According to Oguntona (2006), he opined that early childhood starts from in-uterus to new birth and then through postnatal life. He also confirmed in intra uterine life, the nutritional status of the unborn foetus depends largely on the adequacy of the dietary intake of the mother and this determines the outcome of birth of the new born.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Low levels of nutrition adversely affect physical and mental growth of children. Malnutrition in early childhood is associated with significant functional impairment in adult life, reduced work capacity and decreasing economic productivity.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The main purpose of this study was to assess the nutritional status of Primary School children in Ikorodu Local Government Area of Lagos State.
- There is no significant difference between the nutritional status of male and female primary school children in Ikorodu Local Government Area.
- There is no significant relationship between the socio economic background of parents and nutritional status of primary school children in Ikorodu Local Government Area.
- There is no significance difference between the nutritional status of pupils in public and private primary school in Ikorodu Local Government Area of Lagos State.
- There is no significance difference between the factors that affect the nutritional status of primary school children in Ikorodu Local Government Area of Lagos State.
This chapter makes an attempt to review related literatures to give solid support from earlier studies to this study. The organization of this chapter is as follows:
- Literature Review
- 1 Introduction To Malnutrition
- 1.1 Definition Of Malnutrition
- 1.2 Classification Of Malnutrition
- 1.3 Introduction To Nutritional Status
- 1.4 Meaning Of Socio-Economic Status
- 1.5 Family Background
- 1.6 Parent Level Of Education
- 1.7 Family Background
4.0 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1.1 Demographic Data
Table I: Gender Distribution of the Respondents
From Table 1 above, eighty (80) respondents representing 40.0% were males, while one hundred and twenty (120) respondents representing 60.0% were females.
Table 2: Respondents’ Class
From Table 2 above, sixty six (66) respondents representing 33.0% were from primary one, while sixty 67 (67) respondents representing 35.5% were from primary two and three respectively.
Table 3: Number in the Family of Respondents
|No in the family:||Frequency||Percentage %|
|Five & Above||34||17.0|
Table 3 above showed that thirty five (35) respondents representing 17.5% claimed that their family number is two, seventy seven (77) respondents representing 38.5% claimed that their family number is three, also forty six (46) respondents representing 23.0% claimed that their family number is four while thirty four (34) respondents representing 17.0% claimed that their family number is five and above.
Download the full project