Impact of the Bolsa Família Program on energy, macronutrient, and micronutrient intakes: Study of the Northeast and Southeast

Abstract

A B S T R A C T ObjectiveTo assess the impact of the Bolsa Família Program on the energy and nutrient intakes of beneficiaries from the Brazilian Northeast and Southeast regions. MethodsThe study used data from the 2008-2009 Pesquisa de Orçamento Famíliar, which assessed individual food intake on two nonconsecutive days of individuals aged more than 10 years. Based the personal information booklet, food intake values were transformed into nutritional values (energy and nutrients). Analysis of the impact measure was preceded by propensity score matching, a technique that matches some socioeconomic characteristics of beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries. Once the score was calculated, the impact of the Bolsa Família Program was estimated by nearest neighbor matching. ResultsThe program increased energy and macronutrient intakes and decreased calcium and vitamin A, D, E, and C intakes of adolescent beneficiaries in both regions. Adult beneficiaries from the Southeast region increased their fiber, iron, and selenium intakes, and those from the Northeast region decreased their energy, lipid, added sugar, sodium, zinc, vitamin E, and pyridoxine intakes.

Association of Conditional Cash Transfers With Maternal Mortality Using the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort

“…The CCT BFP might affect maternal mortality through different mechanisms. First, the income transferred to women can have a more immediate effect, with the allocation of money for purchase of food, the use of health services, and mobility, particularly if it is coupled with shifts in intrahousehold power or autonomy favoring women . Second, by fulfilling conditionalities, BFP can increase access and the use of health services by reducing barriers and increasing the monitoring and treatment of comorbidities, facilitating referrals to high-risk prenatal care, and ensuring adequate assistance while giving birth.…”

“…First, the income transferred to women can have a more immediate effect, with the allocation of money for purchase of food, the use of health services, and mobility, particularly if it is coupled with shifts in intrahousehold power or autonomy favoring women. [37][38][39][40][41][42] Second, by fulfilling conditionalities, BFP can increase access and the use of health services by reducing barriers and increasing the monitoring and treatment of comorbidities, facilitating referrals to high-risk prenatal care, and ensuring adequate assistance while giving birth. Receipt of BFP increased the interbirth interval and use of prenatal care, lending additional support to our hypothesis that BFP is associated with maternal mortality through the effect of relevant determinants of maternal mortality.…”

Evaluating the impact of the Bolsa Familia conditional cash transfer program on premature cardiovascular and all-cause mortality using the 100 million Brazilian cohort: a natural experiment study protocol

“…Possible short-term impacts include changes in nutritional status in adults, through reduced salt and ultraprocessed foods intake, increased consumption of foods with high nutrient content, and increases in overall energy intake. [20][21][22][23][24][25] BFP can also affect the socioeconomic conditions of the household, including more working hours, better jobs and higher income. [26][27][28] Effects of CCTs that may be observed at in the medium term include those intermediated by the health conditionalities of BFP, such as increased healthcare utilisation.…”

Contribuição da Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva para a área de Alimentação e Nutrição no Brasil

“…The impact of income transfer programs, particularly the Family Basket, on Food and Nutrition were also among the published articles. Sperandio et al 33 observed that the beneficiaries of the PBF in the Northeast and Southeast regions consumed less processed and ultra-processed foods. However, the consumption of fresh or minimally processed foods was higher in the Northeast region than in the Southeast 33 .…”

“…Sperandio et al 33 observed that the beneficiaries of the PBF in the Northeast and Southeast regions consumed less processed and ultra-processed foods. However, the consumption of fresh or minimally processed foods was higher in the Northeast region than in the Southeast 33 . A cross-sectional population-based study observed food insecurity in 81.6% of the recipient families of the Family Basket.…”