Skip to main content
PLOS Global Public Health logoLink to PLOS Global Public Health
. 2022 Jul 19;2(7):e0000260. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000260

Determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin America and the Caribbean: Findings from a regional analysis

Franziska Gassmann 1, Richard de Groot 2,*, Stephan Dietrich 1, Eszter Timar 1, Florencia Jaccoud 1, Lorena Giuberti 1, Giulio Bordon 1, Yvette Fautsch-Macías 3, Paula Veliz 3, Aashima Garg 4, Maaike Arts 3
Editor: Bai Li5
PMCID: PMC10021987  PMID: 36962164

Abstract

The Latin America and Caribbean region exhibit some of the lowest undernutrition rates globally. Yet, disparities exist between and within countries and countries in the region increasingly face other pressing nutritional concerns, including overweight, micronutrient deficiencies and inadequate child feeding practices. This paper reports findings from a regional analysis to identify the determinants and drivers of children’s diets, with a focus on the complementary feeding window between the age of 6–23 months. The analysis consists of a narrative review and descriptive data analysis, complemented with qualitative interviews with key informants in four countries: Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. Findings indicate that poverty and inequality (disparities within countries by wealth and residence), unequal access to services, inadequate coverage of social programmes and lack of awareness on appropriate feeding practices are important drivers for inadequate diets. We conclude that countries in the region need to invest in policies to tackle overweight and micronutrient deficiencies in young children, considering inequalities between and within countries, enhance coverage of social protection programmes, improve coordination between sectors to improve children’s diets and expand the coverage and intensity of awareness campaigns on feeding practices, using iterative programme designs.

1. Introduction

Nutritious, safe and diverse food is one of the most essential building blocks of human life. Hunger and malnutrition not only violate the basic human right to food but can also have severe consequences that last over one’s lifetime. Malnutrition in young children has detrimental and long-lasting consequences for their physical and cognitive development [1]. Throughout the last decades, countries have made remarkable progress towards eradicating child malnutrition, but many children around the world are still at risk of not meeting their dietary needs. While the global share of children under five with stunting (being too short for one’s age) has declined steadily since 1990, one in five children still experienced impaired growth due to poor nutrition in 2020 [2].

Although the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region registers one of the lowest rates of stunting and wasting (being too thin for one’s height) globally, regional aggregates hide large disparities across countries [3]. In Guatemala, 47% of children under five are stunted, and in Ecuador, Haiti and Honduras more than 20% of the children suffer from wasting [3]. Meanwhile, adequate maternal, infant and young child nutrition remains an exception rather than the norm. According to UNICEF’s latest estimates, a little over one out of three (38%) infants under 6 months old are exclusively breastfed [3]. Although the vast majority (84%) of infants are introduced to solid, semi-solid or soft foods at the recommended age between 6–8 months, many children are consuming solid foods before the recommended 6 months [4]. There is also growing evidence that a dietary transition is taking place and the consumption of foods high in sugar, salt and fat is increasing [5,6], resulting in increasing rates of overweight and its severe form obesity [7]. As a result, 7.5% of children under 5 in the LAC region are affected by overweight, ranging from 3.7% in Haiti to 12.9% in Argentina [2]. Given the large share of children who suffer from micronutrient deficiencies (e.g. iron and vitamin A) [3], LAC faces a ‘triple burden of malnutrition’ (the co-existence of undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies and overweight).

Against this background, it is imperative to understand determinants and drivers of children’s diets and to identify effective interventions that improve the diets of young children. This is particularly relevant since progress against the key nutritional Sustainable Development Goals (Target 2.1 on ending hunger and Target 2.2 on eliminating malnutrition) has been slow [8]. The main aim of this paper is therefore to analyze the determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in LAC. In doing so, we start by providing an overview of current rates of malnutrition and complementary feeding practices in the region. In addition, we aim to identify existing strategic actions that improve young children’s diets in the region. Using multiple research methods, including a narrative review, descriptive data analysis and interviews with key stakeholders, the analysis in this paper identifies barriers and opportunities on how to improve the diets of young children in LAC. The focus is on children from 6 to 23 months of age, which is the age when children transition from exclusive breastfeeding to age-appropriate complementary feeding. This period is a critical window in a child’s development and if complementary foods and feeding practices are inappropriate, there is increased risk of undernutrition (stunting, wasting), micronutrient deficiencies and overweight [9]. For instance, complementary foods high in sugar and fats can lead to overweight while also failing to meet a child’s micronutrient needs. This window is not only critical in meeting children’s dietary needs for their growth and development, but it is also when children’s food preferences and dietary habits are shaped for the rest of their lives. This is the time when they learn to listen and respond to cues of hunger and satiety, which are essential for upholding healthy diets and weight throughout life.

The analysis is based on the UNICEF action framework to improve the diets of young children during the complementary feeding period [10] (Fig 1). The framework recognizes the role of a situational analysis of the determinants of children’s diets. The determinants of young children’s diets during the complementary feeding period include adequate complementary foods, adequate complementary feeding practices, and adequate services. Access to adequate food includes physical and economic access to nutritious, safe and affordable foods. These determinants are shaped by context-specific factors–referred to as drivers. Together, they determine children’s ability to enjoy nutritious, safe, affordable and sustainable diets that protect, promote and support survival, growth and development.

Fig 1. The UNICEF action framework to improve the diets of young children during the complementary feeding period.

Fig 1

Source: UNICEF [11].

The action framework reinforces the need to deliver context-specific strategic actions through multiple systems that have the potential to deliver nutrition interventions: the food system, the health system, the water and sanitation system and the social protection system. The food system includes all actors and steps to get food from farm to mouth. It therefore has a critical role in the availability, accessibility and affordability of nutritious food [3]. The health system too plays a key role in child nutrition from pregnancy through the first years of life through access to affordable and high-quality preventive and curative health care. For example, contact with proper health services through antenatal care monitoring can assist women in keeping proper nutrition during their pregnancy. Having received antenatal care (ANC) services in low- and middle-income countries is associated with improved birth outcomes and longer-term reductions of child mortality and malnourishment [12]. Furthermore, delivery in a health facility with a skilled provider—particularly care delivered in public sector facilities—appears to be positively correlated with favorable breastfeeding practices, providing a good foundation for nutrition at birth [13]. After birth, growth monitoring and nutrition counselling through the health system can be effective ways to improve nutritional status as well as providing an entry point to preventive and curative health care [14]. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) systems are particularly important for safe food preparation, drinking water, and the reduction of infectious disease (like diarrhea) that would limit children’s absorption of micronutrients. The lack of access to proper WASH services can affect child nutrition through diarrheal diseases, intestinal parasite infections and environmental enteropathy [15]. Social protection systems can support households in meeting their dietary needs in different ways. Direct assistance in the form of cash transfers can help caregivers to buy healthy complementary foods for their children, thereby playing an essential role in facilitating access to appropriate diets [16]. Alternatively, transfers can help in seeking health care or upgrading housing conditions, affecting other determinants of malnutrition [17].

2. Methods

2.1. Ethics statement

This study is primarily based on secondary data analysis and a desk review of relevant documents and journal articles. Primary data collection for this study involved in-depth interviews with selected key informants. Participation in the interview was voluntary and consensual. Prior to the interview, written consent was sought and this was reaffirmed at the beginning of the interview. Although ethical approval was not required for this type of study, as employees or affiliates of Maastricht University, the authors were bound by the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity [18].

2.2. Methods

This regional analysis is based on a narrative review and a descriptive analysis of secondary nutritional data, complemented by qualitative interviews with key informants in four selected countries (Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay).

We conducted a descriptive analysis of malnutrition rates (stunting, wasting and overweight) and key complementary feeding indicators for assessing infant and young child feeding practices following WHO-UNICEF infant and young child feeding (IYCF) indicators guidelines using publicly available data, as shown in Table 1. The data for malnutrition rates was extracted from the UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Joint Malnutrition Estimates Expanded Databases, which is the prominent source for malnutrition data to monitor progress towards the Sustainable Development Goal, Target 2.2 to end all forms of malnutrition [2]. Infant and young child feeding indicators were extracted from the UNICEF Global Database on Infant and Young Child feeding, the key source for nutritional data on children [19]. Data visualizations were prepared with Microsoft Excel.

Table 1. Overview of key infant and young child feeding indicators and their definitions.

Indicator Definition
Exclusive breastfeeding The % of children aged 0–5 months who are exclusively breastfed.
Introduction of solid foods The % of children aged 6–8 months who receive solid, semi-solid or soft foods.
Minimum dietary diversity (MDD) The % of children aged 6–23 months who received foods from at least five food groups from the following eight: 1. Breastmilk, 2. Grains, roots, tubers, 3. Legumes and nuts, 4. Dairy products (formula, milk, yogurt, cheese), 5. Flesh foods (meat, fish, poultry, liver, organ meats), 6. Eggs, 7. Vitamin-A rich fruits and vegetables, 8. Other fruits and vegetables
Minimum meal frequency (MMF) The % of children aged 6–23 months who receive solid (solid, semi-solid or soft) foods the minimum number of times. The minimum number of times of complementary feeding for breastfed children is: 2 times for those aged 6–8 months, 3 times for those aged 9–23 months. The minimum number of feeding for non-breastfed children is 4 times solid foods and/or milk feeds for 6–23 months of age.
Minimum acceptable diet (MAD) The % of children aged 6–23 months who receive both the minimum dietary diversity and the minimum meal frequency.

Source: World Health Organization & UNICEF [20].

The narrative review was organized around two elements of the UNICEF Action Framework: 1) The situation and status of young children’s diets, including what, when and how they are fed and the determinants and drivers of young children’s diets, especially those related to food, services and practices; and 2) Strategic actions to improve young children’s diets delivered through the food, WASH, health and social protection systems. Documents were identified via several approaches.

The objective of the narrative review was to 1) identify patterns and determinants of young children’s diets in the region, 2) understand the economic and socio-cultural contexts and drivers relevant to child feeding in LAC, 3) map out policy and existing approaches to improving young children’s diets, and 4) identify knowledge gaps and directions for future research and policy action in the region. The review involved three stages and was conducted in January and February 2020.

First, several key research reports and grey literature were reviewed. This included scoping and review reports on the topic from international organizations such as UNICEF, the FAO, and WFP. The purpose of these reports was to provide a preliminary understanding of recommendations, indicators, and best practices related to the complementary feeding of young children. Key words to be used as search strings in the second stage of the scoping review were also identified based on these reports.

The objective of the second stage of the review was to identify academic and grey literature on the state, determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in the region. This stage relied on a protocol for searching and including literature. The team searched for academic literature via four academic databases/search engines: Google Scholar, PubMed, LATINDEX and Elsevier by using search terms (including BOOLEAN terms) such as “complementary feeding”, “complementary food”, “child diet”, “child nutrition”, “infant nutrition”, “exclusive breastfeeding”, “responsive feeding”, “food system” etc. in combination with “Latin America”, “Caribbean”, and names of countries in the region. The search terms were entered in English, Spanish and Portuguese. We also searched on websites of relevant organizations and initiatives (e.g. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, the World Food Programme, UNICEF, the International Food Policy Research Institute, the Inter-American Development Bank, the Institute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama, the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition, Scaling up Nutrition etc.). Finally, we used snowballing techniques starting from key documents identified through the desk review, in which the reference list in these key papers was traced and relevant papers reviewed. These reference lists were subjected to the same key search terms as above to identify potentially relevant papers. To provide the most up-to-date information, the literature search was limited to documents published after 2010. The search protocol did not include restrictions on methodology or sample size: both quantitative and qualitative research, as well as review papers were permitted if they aligned with the study objective. A geographic restriction was applied: publications had to pertain to the region (either as a whole or to individual countries in the region). See S1 Text for details on the search protocol.

The literature identified through these stages were first subjected to title- and abstract-screening. The information of those that appeared relevant were entered into an Excel sheet, and the study team conducted a full-text screening to decide which publications to include (based on their relevance and quality).

To gain a more in-depth understanding of the determinants and drivers of children’s diets as well as institutional contexts, key informant interviews were conducted with stakeholders in four countries: Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. Countries were selected purposefully to include a broad range of dietary and nutrition situations in the region, as well as different socio-economic and policy situations. For example, Guatemala has the highest stunting rates in the region and a high cultural diversity. Paraguay also has a diverse population. Peru is considered a success story in reducing stunting. And while Uruguay is a high-income country; the others are all upper-middle income according to the World Bank classification [21]. In each of the four countries, four or five key informants from different sectors and institutional levels were selected, including staff from NGOs, government officials, researchers and international development practitioners. Recruitment into the study was based on purposeful selection in consultation with local UNICEF offices. By purposefully selecting informants based on their expertise, the study was able to generate the most salient information for each country within a relatively short timeframe.

Interviews followed a semi-structured approach and respondents were asked about the overall situation of child nutrition in their countries, about the barriers and facilitators of improving children’s diets, and the legal and policy frameworks. Interview questions were adjusted for the specific type of respondent. For example, interviews with central government bodies were more concerned with the overall situation and the government’s priorities and vision. NGO workers were asked about their concrete experiences on the ground, descriptions of children’s diets and needs, as well as potential barriers and lessons learned. Interviews were conducted in July and August 2020 via telephone or over the internet, in the language preferred by the respondent (Spanish or English). Interviews were completed by three members of the research team, while the analysis was conducted by two other researchers to avoid bias in the interpretation of the interviews. All interviewers had no relation to the key informants prior to the interview. The interviews adhered to ethical standards as set out by the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity [18]. Participation was voluntary and consensual. Prior to the interview consent was sought and this was reaffirmed at the beginning of the interview. In addition, provided the participant consented, the interviews were audio-recorded to ensure the statements were captured in the correct context. These audio recordings were stored in a password protected online server and were only accessible to the interviewers to clarify any statements during the analysis stage. Furthermore, the data was treated confidentially and anonymously, and hence no direct reference to the key informant is made in this paper. The interviewers, who were also fluent in English, took detailed notes during the interview and then translated the notes into English for the analysis. Additional information regarding the ethical, cultural, and scientific considerations specific to inclusivity in global research is included in the Supporting Information (S4 Text).

The qualitative analysis followed a deductive content analysis process [22], focusing on extracting predetermined key emerging themes across six broad topics: 1) General context in the country regarding the food environment and recent developments, 2) Institutional context and legal frameworks with respect to complementary feeding; 3) Food and agriculture, 4) Health system; 5) Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH); 6) Social protection. The latter four sectors were included following the UNICEF conceptual framework as sectors that have the potential to deliver nutrition interventions at scale. The interviews were analyzed per country and answers were categorized under each relevant topic using a predefined analysis sheet. For each topical area, it was determined to what extent the various informants for each country agreed on the major themes, as a triangulation measure. Based on this categorization, a summary was developed per country, which formed the basis for a more extensive reporting and comparisons on the emerging findings across the four countries. We integrated findings from the narrative review and the descriptive analysis into the country qualitative analysis to triangulate findings from the expert interviews with the available data and country-specific literature.

3. Results

On average, the LAC region registers one of the lowest rates of stunting (11%) and wasting (1.3%) globally [2]. However, notable exceptions remain hidden by regional aggregates: in Guatemala, 47% of children under five are affected by stunting, and Ecuador, Haiti and Honduras have stunting rates above 20%. Meanwhile, overweight affects more and more of the region’s population, including children. The magnitude of the problem of overweight is shown in Fig 2. In most countries with available data (collected after 2010), rates of overweight among children under 5 are 5% or higher, with the largest burden in Argentina, Paraguay and Barbados. Malnutrition in children under 5 also differs within countries, with stunting and wasting more prevalent among children in the lowest wealth quintiles and (for stunting) in rural areas (S2 Text, Fig A, B, D and E). In contrast, overweight is more concentrated among children in urban areas and in the highest wealth quintile (S2 Text, Fig C and F). Recently, micronutrient deficiencies have become a more pressing public health concern than stunting. The rate of micronutrient deficiency, in terms of vitamin A and iron deficiency, in children under 5 is 36%, 37% and 46% in South America, Central America and the Caribbean, respectively [3].

Fig 2. The prevalence of stunting, wasting and overweight in Latin American and the Caribbean countries.

Fig 2

Note: The figure shows the prevalence of stunting, wasting and overweight for each country using the latest available data since 2010. Abbreviations: ARG: Argentina, BLZ: Belize, BOL: Bolivia, BRB: Barbados, CHL: Chili, COL: Colombia, DOM: Dominican Republic, ECU: Ecuador, ELS: El Salvador, GTM: Guatemala, GUY: Guyana, HND: Honduras, HTI: Haiti, JAM: Jamaica, MEX: Mexico, NIC: Nicaragua, PER: Peru, PRY: Paraguay, SUR: Suriname, TAT: Trinidad and Tobago, URY: Uruguay. Source: authors’ calculations based on UNICEF Global Database.

An overview of the key complementary feeding indicators paints the picture of a very heterogenous region (Fig 3). Countries with the highest rates of exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months of life are Peru (66%), Bolivia (58%), Guatemala (53%), El Salvador (47%) and Haiti (40%). Among countries with available data, Suriname (3%) and the Dominican Republic (5%) lag the most in terms of exclusive breastfeeding. Within countries, exclusive breastfeeding is more common among households in the lowest wealth quintile and those in rural areas (S2 Text, Fig G and I).

Fig 3. Exclusive breastfeeding and introduction of solid foods in Latin American and the Caribbean countries.

Fig 3

Note: The figure shows the prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding among children < 6 months and the share of infants aged 6–8 months who are introduced to solid foods for each country using the latest available data since 2010. Abbreviations: ARG: Argentina, BLZ: Belize, BOL: Bolivia, BRB: Barbados, COL: Colombia, CRI: Costa Rica, CUB: Cuba, DOM: Dominican Republic, ECU: Ecuador, ELS: El Salvador, GTM: Guatemala, GUY: Guyana, HND: Honduras, HTI: Haiti, JAM: Jamaica, MEX: Mexico, NIC: Nicaragua, PAN: Panama, PER: Peru, PRY: Paraguay, SUR: Suriname, TAT: Trinidad and Tobago. Source: authors’ calculations based on UNICEF Global Database.

Most infants between six and eight months of age received solid, semi-solid or soft foods in all countries with available data (Fig 3). In Argentina, Cuba, El Salvador, Haiti and Peru, over 90% of infants have been introduced to complementary foods during this period. While on average, most infants are receiving solid, semi-solid or soft foods at the recommended time, there is quite some regional variation within the region. For example, in Belize, Ecuador, Guatemala, Jamaica, Panama, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago, the corresponding rate was below 80%. There is also variation within countries, with a larger share of urban children and those in the highest wealth quintile receiving solid, semi-solid or soft foods at the recommended time (S2 Text, Fig H and J).

Information about the indicators on dietary adequacy (MDD, MMF and MAD) is limited in the region (Fig 4). Some countries have data on one indicator but not the other, which makes it difficult to measure compliance with minimum acceptable diet recommendations. In the countries with available data, the rates of young children meeting the MDD requirements are alarming. Most countries reported rates below 60%, with the most alarming situation in Haiti, where only one out of five infants (19%) met the requirement for a diverse diet. Peru (82.9%) has the highest share of children receiving a sufficiently diverse diet. For those countries for which multiple years of data are available, trends are not positive. In the Dominican Republic, the rate of MDD decreased between 2007 and 2014 from 58% to 51%. In Haiti, the rate decreased from 23% in 2005 to 19% in 2016, and in Guyana, the rate decreased from 48% in 2009 to 40% in 2014. In Honduras, the rate of MDD increased only marginally from 58% to 61% between 2005 and 2011. The exception is Peru, which registered an increase from 73% in 2007 to 83% in 2016, though the trend stagnated over the last three data periods.

Fig 4. Adequacy of children’s diets in Latin American and the Caribbean countries.

Fig 4

Note: The figure shows the prevalence of minimum meal frequency, minimum diet diversity and minimum acceptable diet among children 6–23 months for each country using the latest available data since 2010. Abbreviations: ARG: Argentina, BLZ: Belize, BOL: Bolivia, BRB: Barbados, COL: Colombia, CRI: Costa Rica, CUB: Cuba, DOM: Dominican Republic, ELS: El Salvador, GTM: Guatemala, GUY: Guyana, HND: Honduras, HTI: Haiti, JAM: Jamaica, MEX: Mexico, PAN: Panama, PER: Peru, PRY: Paraguay, SUR: Suriname, TAT: Trinidad and Tobago. Source: Authors’ calculations based on UNICEF Global Database.

Compliance with MMF recommendations is less of a challenge in the region. Two Caribbean countries, Haiti (39%) and Jamaica (42%) report the lowest prevalence of MMF. In all other countries, at least half of young children are fed the minimally recommended number of times, reaching at least 80% in the Central American countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico.

The computation of MAD requires data on both MDD and MMF, it can therefore only be reported for 10 countries (Fig 4). There are large differences in the prevalence of MAD. In El Salvador nearly two-thirds of children 6–23 months receive a minimal acceptable diet. In Cuba, Guatemala and Honduras, every second infant receives both enough quantity and types of food, while in Haiti only one in nine does.

Indicators of dietary adequacy vary considerably with wealth and residence. A larger share of children in wealthier households and those residing in urban areas meet dietary recommendations compared to children in the lowest wealth quintile or those in rural areas (S2 Text, Fig K-P).

3.1. Determinants and drivers of children’s diets in Latin America and the Caribbean

3.1.1. Access to adequate foods

The LAC region produces more than enough quantity of food to meet the energy needs of its population [23]. Home production in the form of family farming plays a major role, accounting for about 81% of agricultural activities in LAC [24], and supplies between 27% and 67% of food production [5]. The growth of food production exceeds population growth and the region is blessed with favorable environmental conditions and capacity for production. Marked differences exist between and within sub-regions, which makes trade and collaboration between countries important for ensuring equitable food availability [23].

At the household-level, a major obstacle to consuming diverse and healthy diets is the inability to afford them. The cost of a simple, healthy plate of food (a stew made of beans or other pulses, paired with a carbohydrate component that matches local preferences amounting to 600 kcal) is estimated to cost 4.0%, 5.4%, 6.3% and 35% of an average daily income in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Haiti, respectively. A similar plate of food would cost only 0.6% of the average daily income of a citizen in New York. Since these estimates are averages, costs are likely higher for poorer households [25]. Another study on the relative costs of nutritious food showed that dark green leafy vegetables and vitamin-A rich fruits and vegetables are a relatively expensive source of calories in LAC. On the other hand, with the exception of fish, animal-sourced foods like diary and meat are relatively inexpensive [26]. A cost-of-diet analysis in El Salvador showed that between 24% and 30% of households would not be able to purchase a minimum cost nutritious diet [27].

At the child-level, grains, roots and tubers are the most prevalent complementary foods in the region, consumed by 88% of infants [4]. Animal source foods are also relatively widespread, with dairy products being the most common, followed by flesh foods and eggs. Overall, less than 10% of infants were reported to not consume any type of animal source food [4].

There are considerable disparities in the diets of infants across areas of residence and quintiles of wealth, with animal source food consumption being more common in urban and rich households [4]. An understanding of this inequality is important because animal source foods are the richest sources of iron and zinc [28], and meat intake is associated with better growth and development outcomes [29].

As countries move forward on the path of socio-economic development, formula-feeding becomes more prevalent [3]. Recent aggregate sales data confirms that commercial milk-based formulas are increasingly becoming a part of young children’s diets in the region. Between 2008 and 2013, Brazil and Peru were among the countries with the fastest growing sales of formulas globally by 133% and 160%, respectively. In contrast, the sales of infant/child milk-based formulas grew by only 11% in Mexico [30].

Overweight, obesity and the shift towards unhealthy diets can also be explained by the increased availability of energy-rich but micronutrient poor, processed foods in the region. Recently, there has been a major shift in the availability and consumption of ready-to-eat, ready-to-heat, processed, and packaged foods and beverages in the LAC region [23,31]. For example, sales of ultra-processed food and drink products increased by 8.3% between 2009 and 2014, with these trends projected to continue to grow [23]. In addition, the consumption of ultra-processed products grew by more than 25% between 2000 and 2013, and fast-food consumption increased by almost 40% over the same period. In Latin America, most ultra-processed products are increasingly sold in convenience stores, supermarkets, and hypermarkets [6].

3.1.2. Adequate services

Some countries in the region still have a long way to go to achieve adequate WASH services for all, especially Bolivia and Haiti. While in 2015, 95% of the region’s population used an improved drinking water source, the gap between the poor and the better-off, and between rural and urban areas, remains wide [32,33].

The significance of inappropriate WASH services for children’s diets was highlighted by a qualitative study of 16 low- and middle-income countries (including Bolivia, Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti and Mexico), which examined the relationship between water security and infant feeding [34]. Water insecurity was associated with poor quality and quantity of drinking water available for young children. Moreover, caregivers echoed that unsafe water meant that they could not prepare complementary foods as safely and hygienically as they would have wished to. Some of them substituted preferred complementary foods with other, less preferred ones to reduce the risk of contamination. Some respondents also reported delaying infant feeding until clean water is available. Respondents also observed a link between poor water quality and infant morbidity (such as infectious diseases, diarrhea, stomach and skin irritation, undernutrition and dehydration).

Overall, 34% of all households in the region are covered by social assistance programmes, including 60% of all households in the bottom quintile of the income distribution [35]. The LAC region has been a global leader in demonstrating the potential of cash transfer programmes in supporting the health and nutritional needs of young children, with different studies identifying 15 to 30 national conditional cash transfers (CCTs) in 2015/16 [36,37]. In 2016, 16.9% of all households (a total of nearly 30 million families) in the LAC region participated in at least one programme [36]. A review of three CCTs in Brazil, Colombia and Mexico found consistent evidence that these programmes had a positive effect on child nutrition [38].

In terms of health services, a regional study showed that out of 15 countries in LAC, 13 have growth monitoring policies in place [39], but it is unclear at a regional level how many children comply with monitoring visits. Moreover, Community Health Workers (CHWs) can play a key role in nutrition service delivery through the health system. For example, a case study in Haiti showed that CHWs performed 24 of the recommended 38 nutrition services [40]. Yet, little information is available across the region on the numbers of CHWs, and their responsibilities [41].

3.1.3. Adequate feeding practices

Indigenous populations are often more at risk of malnutrition and poor health outcomes [42,43]. A study of infant feeding practices in the Peruvian Amazon found that traditional complementary foods in the Ajawún community largely met WHO recommendations, and the foods consumed were more nutrient dense and higher quality than marketed foods. However, the intake of some micronutrients (mostly zinc, iron and Vitamin A) was below the adequate level [44]. Another study, also conducted in the Peruvian Amazon, concluded that the period of exclusive breastfeeding in the community was too short and that meal frequency and diversity did not meet standards [45].

Caregivers’ perceptions and preferences for complementary foods may diverge from those of nutritionists’ and policymakers [46]. Researchers in Mexico found that mothers working outside the home value the convenience, flavor and vitamin content of marketed and/or processed complementary foods but are also concerned about their sugar and chemical contents. The shift towards formula feeding is also related to their convenience, especially in the absence of daycare, maternity leave and flexible work policies [30].

3.1.4. Existing strategic actions to improve children’s diets

In LAC, the supplementation of food with vital micronutrients, such as vitamin A, iron, zinc and others is widespread [47]. Many countries also provide universal fortification of staple foods, for example iodine in salt, vitamin A in sugar, and varying fortifications including iron, zinc, vitamin B12, folic acid and more in wheat and maize flour and rice [47]. Twelve countries target households with infants 6–23 months with multiple micronutrients powders so that complementary foods can be fortified by caregivers themselves [47].

Several countries have adopted regulatory strategies to reduce the accessibility, availability and desirability of sugar-sweetened beverages and unhealthy or ultra-processed foods. These strategies include ‘sugar taxes’, advertising restrictions and requirements for transparency in food labeling and facilitating purchasing choices by caregivers. An overview of Latin American countries found 39 such regulatory strategies aimed at reducing the consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages, with Chile, Ecuador and Mexico having made the most comprehensive efforts [48].

Nutrition actions are most commonly delivered through food security and nutrition policies, but some countries have incorporated nutrition goals in other sectors such as agriculture, education, environment, development and employment policies [39]. A review of nutrition policies showed that most of the 18 countries reviewed have one or more nutrition-related and/or sectoral policy in line with the WHO recommendations for Comprehensive Implementation Plan on Maternal, Infant and Young Child Nutrition [39]. Interdisciplinary evidence on what types of national strategies are the most effective, however, are lacking [48].

3.2. A view from the experts

Interviews with key informants provided further insights into the determinants and drivers of infant and young child nutrition in four countries: Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. The affiliation of key informants per country is provided in Table 2. Names and positions of the informants are excluded to protect their identity. Key findings from the interviews are summarized in Table 3 and described below.

Table 2. Affiliation of key informants in selected countries.

Country Organization
Guatemala Secretaría de Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional 
FAO
UNICEF
Helvetas
Paraguay Instituto Nacional de Alimentación del Ministerio de Salud
FAO
Sociedad Científica y Academica
Sociedad Científica y Academica
Peru Ministry of Development and Social Inclusion
CENAN
WFP
FAO
Instituto de Investigación Nutricional
Uruguay Uruguay Crece Contigo
formerly UNICEF
Uruguay National University
Uruguay National University, FAO

Table 3. Summary of drivers of children’s diets per determinant based on key informant interviews, by country.

Determinant Guatemala Paraguay Peru Uruguay
Adequate food • Lack of resources and limited caregiver awareness results in poor diet diversity
• Lack of access to iron-rich food
• Low economic access to food
• High availability of ultra-processed foods
• High relative cost of fruits and vegetables
• High cost of animal-source foods
• Strong promotion of breastmilk substitutes
• In response to concerns over anemia, the government and commercial parties have promoted the use of iron-rich products for infants, compromising fresh and healthy alternatives
• Purchasing power of the household
• Availability and convenience of ultra-processed foods
Adequate services • Unequal access to health services, due to geographical barriers
• Machismo and social restrictions are substantial barriers to access to health care
• Funding and managing access to WASH
• Lack of nutrition-sensitivity in social programmes
• Barriers for access to healthcare services include distance, and lack of trained personnel in primary care facilities.
• Limited coverage of social protection programmes, that have limited coverage due to budgetary restrictions
• Inequalities in access to WASH services.
• Limited support regarding infant and young child feeding
• Lack of trained health staff
• Inadequate flow of budgetary resources and lack of coordination to support the regional directorates of Health especially in rural areas
• Ineffective, vertical relationship between health personnel and caregivers
• Lack of urban social protection coverage
• Poor access to potable water and lack of refrigeration, particularly in rural areas
• Outdated health professionals’ knowledge on infant and young child feeding
• Mistrust towards health professionals and their recommendations
• Limited coverage of social protection programmes, with demand exceeding supply
Adequate practices • Cultural beliefs in the use of chlorine
• Traditional gender roles around hygiene
• Lack of knowledge and nutrition-related awareness for mothers
• The food culture results in a diet that is high in fat and carbohydrates
• Early introduction to complementary foods
• Early introduction to sweet beverages
• Lack of knowledge among caregivers
• Convenience to use processed foods among working urban households
• High consumption of highly processed foods, especially in children
• Beliefs and social representations around food
• Limited time for food preparation

Child undernutrition remains a widespread issue in Guatemala: the country has the highest rate of stunting in the LAC region, affecting nearly half of all children under five, and almost half of all children under six suffer from anemia. There appears to be inequality of access to healthy diets between different groups of the population, evidenced by the concentration of nutritional deficiencies among children in low-income households, in rural areas and from indigenous groups. In terms of adequate food, low dietary diversity is one of the main drivers of nutritional deficiencies, according to key informants, driven by a lack of resources, limited caregiver awareness and lack of access to iron-rich foods

“70 percent of people and workers in the agricultural sector have children that are suffering from stunting. They don’t have enough resources. This is one of the underlying problems.” (Staff from an international organization (IO))

Adequate services are limited by unequal access to quality health care due to geographical barriers and traditional gender roles. In addition, funding and management of WASH services is hampered by structural issues such as financing and administrating the technical services. Moreover, social protection programmes currently lack nutrition sensitive goals.

Adequate practices in Guatemala are constrained by cultural beliefs, for example on the use of chlorine to treat water. In addition, traditional gender roles around hygiene persist and men do not follow standard hygiene practices.

Despite a strong policy framework, in the form of the recently established Gran Cruzada Nacional por la Nutrición, there is room for improved inter-institutional collaboration and continuity over time in governments’ actions, according to the key informants.

“This [nutrition policies] changes a lot, depending on the government in power. So I think there has to be continuity. Simultaneously, the diversity of the diet, raising animals, having family agriculture, having a complementary feeding program, continuing with powdered micronutrients and the theme of behavior change should be promoted. This has to be an inter-institutional work, where many ministries collaborate towards the same message, that is, with integrated actions of the Government.” (Government official)

In Paraguay, overweight among young children is a more pressing public health problem than undernutrition. Only three out of ten children under six months of age are exclusively breastfed and children’s diets are low in diversity. Major barriers to adequate food include poverty, the price of healthy products versus processed foods and the high availability of ultra-processed foods (Table 3).

“The cost of the food that can provide you with a nutritionally appropriate diet is very high in relation to a cost that provides you with the same calories, but in a totally unbalanced way, with excess carbohydrates or processed foods” (Staff from IO)

In terms of adequate services, key informants noted barriers to access healthcare services, including geographic distance as well as a lack of trained health staff. Moreover, social protection programmes, like PANI and Tekopora only provide limited coverage, due to budgetary restrictions. The country also exhibits inequalities in access to WASH services. While 95% of households in Paraguay have access to an improved source of drinking water, and 83% has access to an improved sanitation facility, there are large inequalities by area of residence, income level and for indigenous groups [49]. There is also limited support in the country regarding infant and young child feeding according to key informants, resulting in poor caregivers’ knowledge and practices about how to feed young children.

Furthermore, key informants noted that adequate practices in Paraguay are limited by a food culture that is high in fat and carbohydrates, the (too) early introduction of complementary foods and early introduction of sweet beverages, like juices, at very early ages.

There is also limited attention to the issue of overweight and accompanying policy measures on the political agenda, for example by regulating ultra-processed foods, according to key informants. Experts also noted the need for strong coordination between different State and non-State actors, as the issue of child nutrition extends across sectors:

“We must strive to achieve that common vision and join forces to meet the proposed goals. Because sometimes along the way we lose strength if we work kind of independently.” (Government official)

Peru made significant progress to reduce stunting, and it outperforms the other countries in the region when it comes to complementary feeding practices. Yet, overweight and micronutrient deficiencies, notably anemia, continue to be public health problems. Respondents stated the low levels of caregiver’s knowledge on appropriate feeding practices, insufficiently trained health workers and ineffective coordination mechanisms between relevant line ministries and other stakeholders as the key bottlenecks for adequate children’s diets. Furthermore, animal-sourced foods tend to be expensive, especially in rural areas, and pharmaceutical companies heavily promote the use of breastmilk substitutes. Iron-rich, processed foods are also promoted in response to concerns over anemia, yet this compromises resources for fresh and healthy foods.

In terms of health services, key informants also expressed concerns about the inadequate flow of budgetary resources and the lack of coordination to support regional directorates of health. In addition, according to key informants, health sector personnel have a ‘vertical relationship’ with clients, giving orders rather than providing tailored recommendations for complementary feeding practices. The social protection landscape is characterized by poor coverage in urban areas, while access to WASH, like potable water and sanitation, is more restricted in rural areas.

Besides lack of nutritional knowledge among caregivers, convenience to purchase processed food was cited as a barrier for adequate practices. In urban areas, many mothers work in informal jobs, creating a barrier for exclusive breastfeeding and adequate complementary feeding. Due to convenience and lack of time to prepare meals, use of processed foods is high among working caregivers in urban areas.

Experts expressed that Peru has a strong legislative and policy framework, in part due to the progress made when the nutrition agenda was under the prime minister’s responsibility.

“The time we had improvements in stunting was the time when nutrition was managed at the prime minister level. Nowadays, nutrition has been delegated to the social inclusion minister, but he does not have the same power to push for results.” (Staff of IO)

A key emerging theme was the need for integrated and cross-sectoral collaboration, as informants recognized that child nutrition is a complex issue reaching across sectors. In the words of one informant:

“I believe that the greatest obstacle is the ability to articulate between the sectors in the State, because such a reform can only be achieved by the State.” (Government official)

Uruguay’s malnutrition rates are in line with the regional average, but the country lacks recent data on complementary feeding practices and micronutrient deficiencies at the time of the study. Key barriers for healthy diets include monetary poverty, the high intake of ultra-processed foods, and the lack of credibility of health workers. Another barrier in the health sector is outdated health professionals’ knowledge on infant and young child feeding. According to key informants, specialists often provide conflicting advice, together with a perceived lack of empathy from their side, which undermines their credibility. As for social protection services, including Uruguay Crece Contigo, they are often limited in terms of coverage. According to the key informants, while UCC targets the entire population of pregnant women and children under four years, there is more demand than the programme can meet.

Adequate feeding practices are further limited by a high consumption of ultra-processed foods, especially among children, driven by the strong influence of marketing. In addition, certain beliefs and social representations around food create barriers. For example, the introduction of meat is believed to cause choking, which leads some parents to introduce it at a later age than appropriate. Finally, experts stated that families have a limited amount of time for food preparation and to devote for eating.

Overall, Uruguay’s policy landscape to support progress in terms of healthy diets is adequate, according to key informants. However, there is room for the expansion of integrated social programmes and a stronger policy response to unhealthy eating habits.

“There is a demand greater than the coverage capacity, with the exception of transfers. In the education centers of public offer, as well as in the family accompaniment in “Uruguay Crece Contigo”, we have more demand than supply.” (Government Officers)

Experts expressed that regular data collection and monitoring of complementary feeding indicators should be prioritized to monitor progress. In addition, there needs to be a better vision on how the food system can support health diets.

“There is a lack of vision of the food system to guarantee an adequate diet. What are the relationships between the different components of the food systems, in order to guarantee adequate food, not only complementary food, but food and all stages of life?” (Researcher)

4. Discussion

This regional analysis sought to identify determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in LAC. It applied the UNICEF Action Framework for improving young children’s diets to examine determinants and drivers in terms of adequate food, adequate services and adequate practices. The study also provided a detailed look at nutritional indicators across the region. In addition, the analysis identified strategic actions to improve children’s diets through the food system, health system, WASH system and social protection system.

The descriptive analysis showed that the region performs rather well in child undernutrition prevalence, but the dietary transition of the past decades has brought about new challenges. Wasting and stunting have reached low aggregate levels, but sub-regional differences and notable exceptions exist. In addition, disparities within countries exist by residence and wealth status, with those in rural areas and in the poorest quintile in general having poorer nutritional outcomes and complementary feeding practices. Despite progress in stunting reduction, undernutrition (stunting and wasting) and micronutrient deficiencies of young children remain a concern. Moreover, overweight and its severe form obesity are becoming a regional challenge. This triple burden of malnutrition (the co-existence of undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies and overweight) is perhaps the most pressing issue for countries in LAC to tackle, in order to realize good nutrition and health for all children.

Complementary feeding indicators paint a mixed picture. In countries with low rates of exclusive breastfeeding, too early introduction of complementary foods or beverages is likely to be a concern, particularly if those foods or beverages are high in sugar, sodium or unhealthy fats. Many children are consuming solid foods during the 6-8-month window, but many are introduced to them too early as demonstrated by varying rates of exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months of life. Too early introduction of complementary foods puts the child at risk of early weaning and compromises the essential nutrients from breastmilk. Indeed, nearly half (48%) of all children aged 4–5 months in LAC received solid foods, suggesting that too early introduction of complementary food is common [50]. Most infants are fed an appropriate number of times a day, but their diets are lacking in diversity. Overall, the concern is the quality rather than quantity of diets.

The low quality of diets is linked to the availability and convenience of packaged, ultra-processed, and sugary foods and drinks. According to key informants, healthy food is often more expensive and more difficult to access than pre-packaged and processed products, especially in urban areas. Access is compounded by a lack of economic means. Research shows that such foods are associated with overweight/obesity and many nutrition-related noncommunicable diseases [6,51]. Evidence from Brazil, Mexico, and Peru suggests that infants’ diets are rich in sugar-sweetened beverages and other unhealthy products [44,52,53]. Intense lobbying of the food industry may prevent efficient regulation to prevent high intakes of such ultra-processed foods. The quality of diets also varies by the purchasing power of the household and the area of residence. Infants in poor and rural households are fed less animal source foods than their peers in better-off and urban families. However, there are considerable knowledge gaps about how changing dietary patterns in Latin American societies are affecting what young children are fed. There is also a need to better understand potential disparities of infant feeding among indigenous and non-indigenous populations. In nearly all case study countries, key informants indicated that children from indigenous communities are generally worse off in terms of dietary quality and their households have difficulties in accessing a diverse diet. Local customs, beliefs and traditions also pose a key barrier for healthy diets.

Services in the dimensions of social protection, health care and WASH can and do contribute to better nutrition for children, but further efforts in these sectors are needed. For example, there is a wide gap in access to safe water and sanitation between urban and rural households and among different countries [32], with Bolivia and Haiti having particularly worrying conditions. According to key informants, households can easily access health services, although geographic distance remains a barrier, especially for those in rural and remote areas. Another barrier in the health system appears to be the lack of empathy or the vertical relation between health care personnel and parents. Due to these issues, parents may have less trust in the formal health system and turn to relatives or other acquaintances for advice and guidance on feeding practices. The role of health services will become more important as LAC embarks on health systems reforms to achieve universal health coverage. The region is currently characterized by large inequalities in access to quality health services [54], and health systems in the region need to strengthen their ties with other sectors to act on the social determinants of health and the risk factors associated with non-communicable diseases, including undernutrition and overweight [55]. The main bottleneck for social protection services is coverage. Most programmes are targeted to rural populations, while urbanization and urban poverty are increasing. For example, the coverage rates for all types of social assistance programmes among the poorest 20% rural households was 72%, 86% 93% and 87% in Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay respectively. For urban households in the bottom quintile, these rates were 63%, 85%, 80% and 90% in the respective countries. Coverage gaps are wider for the total population [35].

Large-scale national policies to reduce micronutrient deficiencies and underweight are implemented in the majority of LAC countries, with supplementation and staple food fortification programmes being the most popular. Despite national implementation, the effectiveness of these programmes depends on the coverage level, which in many countries leaves room for improvement. In addition, several countries in the region could benefit from fortifying oil with vitamin A as a new strategy, including Argentina, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Paraguay and Suriname [56,57].

New efforts are emerging to reduce the triple burden of malnutrition, for instance in the form of sugar taxes, marketing restrictions and labeling requirements. However, inter-sectoral and comprehensive action against overweight and obesity remains a rarity, and more evidence is needed about the effectiveness of individual policies as well as cross-cutting strategies. This was echoed in the qualitative interviews, as key informants called for more integrated and cross-sectoral programming to address nutritional problems. A key theme was the issue of the level of coordination, as for example in Peru, major advancements were made when the authority for the nutrition agenda was at the prime minister’s level, rather than at the level of a line ministry. Perhaps the most pressing gap is related to tackling overweight and obesity. Since these are emerging health challenges in the region, recent reviews found relevant strategic action to be weak or uncoordinated [37,39]. While the initiatives to reduce the desirability of unhealthy foods is a good start, more comprehensive, intersectoral action may be necessary to overcome the triple burden of malnutrition.

The knowledge, attitudes and practices of caregivers vary, and programmes aimed at improving infant feeding practices should consider the local preferences, beliefs, and socio-cultural contexts, as well as the interactions between service providers and caregivers. In the qualitative interviews, several informants noted the lack of awareness on adequate feeding practices among caregivers. They called for additional programming to counsel caregivers in complementary feeding practices, as well as improve the interaction between service providers and caregivers. A notable example is the development and implementation of the food guides in Paraguay, which are used to demonstrate the composition of a healthy diet for children under two years. Understanding the strengths, opportunities as well as the challenges of different population groups’ infant feeding preferences may prove useful in designing infant and young child feeding promotion strategies that caregivers can comply with. Undertaking formative research in the community before implementation was found to be a cornerstone of culturally relevant nutrition education programmes in Peru [58]. Such an iterative process in programme design was also crucial to the strengthening and successful scale-up of the Integrated Strategy for Attention to Nutrition element of Mexico’s flagship CCT programme [59].

This study has several limitations. The literature review was not a systematic review and hence, some relevant studies could have been overlooked. However, the included studies paint a comprehensive picture for the LAC region and for some countries in particular. The triangulation with key informants for selected countries further strengthened the completeness of the information. As for the qualitative part of the study, the number of key informants per country was limited, which may have led to relatively narrow views. The relatively small sample of four countries may prevent major generalizations from these findings, although care was taken to select countries with varying nutritional challenges and socio-economic conditions. In addition, informants were purposefully selected through local UNICEF offices, which may have also influenced the results. Nevertheless, the interviewers were independent researchers and key themes per country were triangulated between interviews to draw out recurrent insights.

Overall, the regional analysis showed that children’s diets in LAC are shaped by several important drivers. Most notably, poverty and inequality, unequal access to services, inadequate coverage of social programmes and lack of awareness on appropriate feeding practices. In addition, disparities within countries by wealth and residence are important factors that influence children’s diets. Countries in the region need to invest in policies to tackle all forms of malnutrition in young children, considering inequalities between and within countries, enhance coverage of social protection programmes, improve coordination between sectors to improve children’s diets and expand coverage and intensity of awareness campaigns on feeding practices, using iterative programme designs.

Supporting information

S1 Text. Literature review search strategy.

(DOCX)

S2 Text. Figures with disaggregated data.

(DOCX)

S3 Text. SRQR checklist.

(DOCX)

S4 Text. Questionnaire on inclusivity.

(DOCX)

S1 Data. Data Figs 2–4.

(ZIP)

Acknowledgments

We are grateful for comments from Jessica White (UNICEF New York) on an earlier version of the report. We also thank UNICEF colleagues in the case study countries for their valuable assistance and coordination: Maria Claudia Santizo from Guatemala, Sonia Avalos from Paraguay, Maria Elena Ugaz from Peru and Nora D’Oliveira from Uruguay. Finally, we are indebted to the key informants who generously gave their time to talk to us and share their insights.

Data Availability

Data used in the manuscript to construct Figs 2–4 are publicly available through data.unicef.org. For sake of transparency, we have included the data needed to generate Figs 2–4 as well as the figures in S2 Text as a supplementary file to the manuscript. Primary data collection for this study involved in-depth interviews with selected key informants. Although ethical approval was not required for this type of study, as employees or affiliates of Maastricht University, the authors were bound by the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (https://www.nwo.nl/en/netherlands-code-conduct-research-integrity). This Code encourages researchers to make their research findings and data public upon completion of research, while establishing valid reasons should this not be possible. The Code lists ‘confidentiality’ as a valid reason for non-disclosure of research data. In our consent procedure (now included in our submission as appendix C), we assured informants that their responses will not be traceable to them personally by stating: “Your name and other information that could identify you will not be used on any study documents. In the reports and other publications that we make about this study, we may use a quote from your interview but we will not identify who you are.” Hence, we are not able to make these transcripts public due to ethical reasons. In addition, we are not able to make (excerpts) of transcripts available to interested outside parties on request since our consent procedure also assured participants that “We will not share your answers with anyone beyond the research team.” That being said, we have included selected excerpts of the interviews (quotes) in the current manuscript, section 3.2, and excerpts will be included in the full study report to be published by UNICEF in the near future.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by a grant from the the Government of The Netherlands (grant number SC189903). The funder did not play any role in the study. The funds were provided to UNICEF New York HQ, who then distributed the funds across all UNICEF regions based on proposals and needs.

References

  • 1.Dewey KG, Begum K. Long-term consequences of stunting in early life. Maternal & child nutrition. 2011;7:5–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2011.00349.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.UNICEF, WHO, World Bank. Joint child malnutrition estimates, 2021 edition [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2020 Feb 1]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news/item/06-05-2021-the-unicef-who-wb-joint-child-malnutrition-estimates-group-released-new-data-for-2021
  • 3.UNICEF. State of the World’s Children 2019. New York: UNICEF; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.White JM, Bégin F, Kumapley R, Murray C, Krasevec J. Complementary feeding practices: Current global and regional estimates. Matern Child Nutr. 2017. Oct;13:e12505. doi: 10.1111/mcn.12505 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/Pan American Health, Pan American Health Organization. Panorama of food and nutritional security in Latin America and the Caribbean 2017. Santiago, Chile; 2017.
  • 6.Pan American Health Organization. Ultra-processed food and drink products in Latin America: Trends, impact on obesity, policy implications. Washington, D.C.: PAHO; 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Popkin BM, Reardon T. Obesity and the food system transformation in Latin America. Obesity Reviews. 2018;19(8):1028–64. doi: 10.1111/obr.12694 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Regional progress towards the SDG targets [Internet]. [cited 2022 Jan 28]. Available from: https://agenda2030lac.org/estadisticas/regional-progress-sdg-targets.html.
  • 9.UNICEF. Infant and young child feeding database [Internet]. Infant and young child feeding database. 2019 [cited 2020 Feb 1]. Available from: https://data.unicef.org/topic/nutrition/infant-and-young-child-feeding/.
  • 10.UNICEF. Action framework on improving young children’s diets. New York: UNICEF; 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.UNICEF. Improving Young Children’s Diets During the Complementary Feeding Period. UNICEF Programming Guidance. [Internet]. New York: UNICEF; 2020. [cited 2022 Jun 29]. Available from: https://www.unscn.org/en/news-events/recent-news?idnews=2030. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kuhnt J, Vollmer S. Antenatal care services and its implications for vital and health outcomes of children: evidence from 193 surveys in 69 low-income and middle-income countries. BMJ Open [Internet]. 2017. Nov 1 [cited 2020 Feb 14];7(11). Available from: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/7/11/e017122. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017122 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Oakley L, Benova L, Macleod D, Lynch CA, Campbell OMR. Early breastfeeding practices: Descriptive analysis of recent Demographic and Health Surveys. Matern Child Nutr. 2018;14(2):e12535. doi: 10.1111/mcn.12535 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ashworth A, Shrimpton R, Jamil K. Growth monitoring and promotion: review of evidence of impact. Matern Child Nutr. 2008. Apr;4 Suppl 1:86–117. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2007.00125.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.World Health Organization, UNICEF, USAID. Improving nutrition outcomes with better water, sanitation and hygiene: Practical solutions for policy and programmes [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. [cited 2020 Feb 20]. Available from: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/washandnutrition/en/. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Owens J. Social Protection [Internet]. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/Pan American Health …; 2017 [cited 2020 Feb 20]. (Strengthening sector policies for better food security and nutrition results). Report No.: 4. Available from: http://www.fao.org/publications/card/en/c/fbb74efa-2601-4fd2-999a-d521767a51de.
  • 17.de Groot R, Palermo T, Handa S, Ragno LP, Peterman A. Cash transfers and child nutrition: pathways and impacts. Development Policy Review. 2017;35(5):621–43. doi: 10.1111/dpr.12255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.KNAW, NFU, NWO, TO2-Federatie, Vereniging Hogescholen, VSNU. Nederlandse gedragscode wetenschappelijke integriteit [Internet]. Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS); 2018 [cited 2022 Feb 14]. Available from: https://easy.dans.knaw.nl/ui/datasets/id/easy-dataset:110600.
  • 19.United Nations Children’s Fund, Division of Data, Analysis, Planning and Monitoring. UNICEF Global Databases: Infant and Young Child Feeding: Exclusive breastfeeding, Introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft foods, Minimum dietary diversity, Minimum meal frequency, Minimum acceptable diet. New York: UNICEF; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.World Health Organization, UNICEF. Indicators for assessing infant and young child feeding practices: definitions and measurement methods. Geneva: World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); 2021. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.World Bank. World Bank Country and Lending Groups [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2022 Jan 18]. Available from: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups.
  • 22.Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of advanced nursing. 2008;62(1):107–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/Pan American Health. Panorama of food and nutritional security in Latin America and the Caribbean 2019. Santiago, Chile; 2019.
  • 24.Leporati M, Salcedo S, Jara B, Boero V, Muñoz M. La agricultura familiar en cifras. In: Salcedo S, Guzmán L, editors. Agricultura Familiar em América Latina y El Caribe: recomendaciones de política. Santiago, Chile: FAO; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.World Food Programme. Counting the Beans—the true cost of a plate of food around the world. Rome: World Food Programme; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Headey DD, Alderman HH. The Relative Caloric Prices of Healthy and Unhealthy Foods Differ Systematically across Income Levels and Continents. J Nutr. 2019. Nov 1;149(11):2020–33. doi: 10.1093/jn/nxz158 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.World Food Programme. Fill the Nutrient Gap—El Salvador. Rome: World Food Programme; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Dewey KG. The Challenge of Meeting Nutrient Needs of Infants and Young Children during the Period of Complementary Feeding: An Evolutionary Perspective. The Journal of Nutrition. 2013. Dec 1;143(12):2050–4. doi: 10.3945/jn.113.182527 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Allen LH. Micronutrient Research, Programs, and Policy: From Meta-analyses to Metabolomics. Advances in Nutrition. 2014. May 6;5(3):344S–351S. doi: 10.3945/an.113.005421 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Baker P, Smith J, Salmon L, Friel S, Kent G, Iellamo A, et al. Global trends and patterns of commercial milk-based formula sales: is an unprecedented infant and young child feeding transition underway? <sup/>. Public Health Nutr. 2016. Oct;19(14):2540–50. doi: 10.1017/S1368980016001117 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Pan American Health Organization. Ultra-processed food and drink products in Latin America: Trends, impact on obesity, policy implications. Washington, DC: PAHO; 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.WHO & UNICEF. Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean [Internet]. Panama: WHO and UNICEF; 2016. Available from: https://washdata.org/report/lac-snapshot-wash-2016-en. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Mújica OJ, Haeberer M, Teague J, Santos-Burgoa C, Galvão LAC. Health inequalities by gradients of access to water and sanitation between countries in the Americas, 1990 and 2010. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública. 2015;38:347–54. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Schuster RC, Butler MS, Wutich A, Miller JD, Young SL, Household Water Insecurity Experiences‐Research Coordination Network (HWISE‐RCN), et al. “If there is no water, we cannot feed our children”: The far‐reaching consequences of water insecurity on infant feeding practices and infant health across 16 low‐ and middle‐income countries. Am J Hum Biol [Internet]. 2020. Jan [cited 2020 Feb 12];32(1). Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajhb.23357. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.World Bank. The Atlas of Social Protection: Indicators of Resilience and Equity [Internet]. World Bank; 2020. [cited 2021 Mar 11]. Available from: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/1229#. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Cecchini S, Atuesta B. Conditional Cash Transfer Programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean: Coverage and Investment Trends. SSRN Journal [Internet]. 2017. [cited 2020 Feb 19]; Available from: https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3037640. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Galicia L, de Romana D, Hardling K, De-Regil R, Grajeda R. Tackling malnutrition in Latin America and the Caribbean: challenges and opportunities. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2016;40(2):138–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Segura-Pérez S, Grajeda R, Pérez-Escamilla R. Conditional cash transfer programs and the health and nutrition of Latin American children. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2016;40(2):124–37. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Tirado MC, Galicia L, Husby HM, Lopez J, Olamendi S, Pia Chaparro M, et al. Mapping of nutrition and sectoral policies addressing malnutrition in Latin America. Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública. 2016;40:114–23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.SPRING APC. How Do Community Health Workers Contribute to Better Nutrition? Haiti. Strengthening Partnerships, Results, and Innovations in Nutrition Globally (SPRING) project; 2016; Arlington, VA. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Perry HB. Health for the People: National Community Health Worker Programs from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. USAID; 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Anderson I, Robson B, Connolly M, Al-Yaman F, Bjertness E, King A, et al. Indigenous and tribal peoples’ health (The Lancet–Lowitja Institute Global Collaboration): a population study. The Lancet. 2016. Jul 9;388(10040):131–57. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00345-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.High Level Panel of Experts,. HLPE Report # 12—Nutrition and food systems. Rome: HLPE; 2017. p. 152. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Roche ML, Creed‐Kanashiro HM, Tuesta I, Kuhnlein HV. Infant and young child feeding in the Peruvian Amazon: the need to promote exclusive breastfeeding and nutrient-dense traditional complementary foods. Maternal & Child Nutrition. 2011;7(3):284–94. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8709.2009.00234.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Lee G, Paredes Olortegui M, Rengifo Pinedo S, Ambikapathi R, Peñataro Yori P, Kosek M, et al. Infant feeding practices in the Peruvian Amazon: implications for programs to improve feeding. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2014. Sep;36(3):150–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Rodriguez-Oliveros MG, Bisogni CA, Frongillo EA. Knowledge about food classification systems and value attributes provides insight for understanding complementary food choices in Mexican working mothers. Appetite. 2014. Dec;83:144–52. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.08.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Lopez de Romana D., Cediel G. Current situation of micronutrients in Latin America: Prevalence of deficienciesand national micronutrient delivery programs [Internet]. Panama: Sight and Life and WFP; 2016. Available from: https://sightandlife.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SAL_WFP_RiceFort_LatinAm-Current-Situation-of-Micronutrients.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Bergallo P, Castagnari V, Fernández A, Mejía R. Regulatory initiatives to reduce sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in Latin America. Romer D, editor. PLoS ONE. 2018. Oct 19;13(10):e0205694. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205694 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Republic of Paraguay, UNICEF. Paraguay Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2016 [Internet]. Asuncion: Republic of Paraguay; 2016 [cited 2021 Mar 1]. Available from: https://mics-surveys-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/MICS5/Latin%20America%20and%20Caribbean/Paraguay/2016/Final/Paraguay%202016%20MICS_Spanish.pdf
  • 50.UNICEF. From the first hour of life: Making the case for improved infant and young child feeding everywhere. New York: UNICEF; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Popkin B. Ultra-processed foods’ impacts on health. Santiago, Chile: FAO; 2019. (2030 –Food, Agriculture and rural development in Latin America and the Caribbean). Report No.: No. 34. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Karnopp EVN, Vaz J dos S, Schafer AA, Muniz LC, Souza R de LV de, Santos I dos, et al. Food consumption of children younger than 6 years according to the degree of food processing. Jornal de Pediatria. 2017. Jan 1;93(1):70–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jped.2016.04.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Rodríguez-Ramírez S, Muñoz-Espinosa A, Rivera JA, González-Castell D, González de Cosío T. Mexican Children under 2 Years of Age Consume Food Groups High in Energy and Low in Micronutrients. J Nutr. 2016. Sep;146(9):1916S–1923S. doi: 10.3945/jn.115.220145 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Frenk J. Leading the way towards universal health coverage: a call to action. The Lancet. 2015. Apr 4;385(9975):1352–8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61467-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.de Andrade LOM, Filho AP, Solar O, Rígoli F, de Salazar LM, Serrate PCF, et al. Social determinants of health, universal health coverage, and sustainable development: case studies from Latin American countries. The Lancet. 2015. Apr 4;385(9975):1343–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Mkambula P, Mbuya MNN, Rowe LA, Sablah M, Friesen VM, Chadha M, et al. The Unfinished Agenda for Food Fortification in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Quantifying Progress, Gaps and Potential Opportunities. Nutrients. 2020. Feb;12(2):354. doi: 10.3390/nu12020354 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Aaron GJ, Friesen VM, Jungjohann S, Garrett GS, Neufeld LM, Myatt M. Coverage of Large-Scale Food Fortification of Edible Oil, Wheat Flour, and Maize Flour Varies Greatly by Vehicle and Country but Is Consistently Lower among the Most Vulnerable: Results from Coverage Surveys in 8 Countries. The Journal of Nutrition. 2017. May 1;147(5):984S–994S. doi: 10.3945/jn.116.245753 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Robert RC, Creed-Kanashiro HM, Villasante R, Narro MR, Penny ME. Strengthening health services to deliver nutrition education to promote complementary feeding and healthy growth of infants and young children: formative research for a successful intervention in peri-urban Trujillo, Peru. Matern Child Nutr. 2017;13(2). doi: 10.1111/mcn.12264 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Bonvecchio Arenas A, González W, Théodore FL, Lozada-Tequeanes AL, Garcia-Guerra A, Alvarado R, et al. Translating Evidence-Based Program Recommendations into Action: The Design, Testing, and Scaling Up of the Behavior Change Strategy EsIAN in Mexico. J Nutr. 2019. Dec 1;149(Supplement_1):2310S–2322S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000260.r001

Decision Letter 0

Bai Li, Julia Robinson

11 Nov 2021

PGPH-D-21-00814

Determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin America and the Caribbean: Findings from a regional analysis

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. Richard de Groot,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. We have considered the paper carefully and feel that the paper addresses an important topic and has merit. However, the reviewers made valuable revision suggestions to help make it a stronger paper.Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised by the reviewers (listed at the end of this email).

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 26 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bai Li, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Journal requirements:

1. Please include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met.  Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript.

2. Thank you for stating "Please note that ethical approval for this type of study was not required by our institutions." Please clarify whether your ethics committee specifically granted you a waiver of ethics approval.

3. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent for interviews. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified:

 - whether consent was obtained

 - whether consent was informed 

 - what type of consent you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). 

 - if the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

4. Please provide separate figure files in .tif or .eps format only, and remove any figures embedded in your manuscript file.  If you are using LaTeX, you do not need to remove embedded figures.

For more information about figure files please see our guidelines: 

https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/s/figures

5. In the online submission form, you indicated that "Data used in the manuscript to construct Figures 2-4 are publicly available through data.unicef.org. Primary data collection for this study involved in-depth interviews with selected key informants. Since transcripts of these interviews contain potentially identifying information, these transcripts will only be made available upon request."

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons by return email and your exemption request will be escalated to the editor for approval. Your exemption request will be handled independently and will not hold up the peer review process, but will need to be resolved should your manuscript be accepted for publication. One of the Editorial team will then be in touch if there are any issues.

6. Pleas eamend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article, therefore should be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

i). State the initials, alongside each funding source, of each author to receive each grant.

ii). State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does this manuscript meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria? Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe methodologically and ethically rigorous research with conclusions that are appropriately drawn based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available (please refer to the Data Availability Statement at the start of the manuscript PDF file)?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS Global Public Health does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: In this article, the authors used a mixed approach to analyze the determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region. Both desk-based literature review and qualitative interviews with key informants in four LAC countries were conducted. Their findings well summarized the key determinants and drivers for inadequate diets in LAC regions and could be used as cues for program/policy design to tackle the malnutritional problem. However, there are some major and minor concerns that should be addressed before the manuscript can be published.

First, the reason why the four countries (Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay) were chosen for the key informant interviews needs to be stated in a clearer way. Do they sufficiently represent the dietary situation of young children in the LAC region?

Second, according to the authors, analysis of key informants interview focused on extracting key emerging themes across six broad topics was performed (Line 133-138). However, in the result (Section 3.2.) only a summary of key informant interview per country was shown. The interview results of each country should be listed in a table and categorized based on each relevant topics, so that readers could compare the results across these countries and identify the common or unique drivers and determinants.

Third, in line 44, the authors defined that “undernutrition” includes “stunting, wasting, and micronutrient deficiencies”. However, in line 341 and 343, “undernutrition” and “micronutrient deficiencies” are listed on the same hierarchy. The definition of “undernutrition” should be clearly defined and kept consistent throughout the manuscript.

In addition, there are some minor concerns:

1) Figure legends are missing. It is difficult to understand the abbreviations in Fig 2-4.

2) The color contrast for Figure 2 and 4 is not strong. Especially in figure 4, it’s difficult to determine whether the bar charts of “BOL 2016” and “PER 2016” represent “minimum diet diversity” or “minimum acceptable diet”. The color for “minimum diet diversity” or “minimum acceptable diet” is too close to be distinguished.

3) Line 28-29, the citation of this statement should be included.

4) Line 62, the full name of “ANC” should be showed when this abbreviation appears at the first time.

Reviewer #2: ------------------------------------------------------

Summary and overall impression of the research

------------------------------------------------------

This article aimed to identify determinants and drivers of children’s diets in the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region with a regional analysis. The authors address an important topic, especially given the current triple burden of malnutrition, current disparities, and budgetary constraints within the LAC region which urge for context-specific understanding and actions. This article holds much promise, and the authors are off to a good start as they employ multiple methods, and make use of a helpful framework to guide the identification of drivers, and structuring of recommended actions. Furthermore, they selected and interviewed key informants of different organisations and levels of influence, of multiple countries which differ in terms of socio-economic and demographic development within the LAC region. The authors share several very interesting and important contextual insights on drivers of children's diet, and actions for addressing the double (or triple) burden of malnutrition in the LAC region.

There are however multiple issues throughout this article which require major revision.

In the introduction, the authors make a strong argument for focussing on disparities within the LAC region, however there is limited and inconsistent continuation of this perspective in the remainder of the article. Most importantly, the formulated research aim does not fully capture all study components. The authors are advised to formulate a list of multiple sub-questions/objectives which represent all utilised study methods. Furthermore, some of the concepts such as determinants/drivers and children’s diet are not well-defined, and used interchangeably which makes it difficult for the reader to extrapolate the key findings and conclusions.

The methods section is clearly structured, and the analysis approach of key informant data is well-described. However, this section currently does not contain sufficient detail for the author’s study to be accurately replicated by other researchers. Furthermore, this article currently reads as a “multiple methods” study instead of a “mixed-methods” study. There is currently no integration, merging or embedding of the different data sources. Also, a more detailed description on data and methodological triangulation processes would increase the credibility and validity of research findings. Lastly, the process of obtaining ethical consent currently lacks detail.

The overall lack detail in the methods section translates into a fairly chaotic presentation of the results and discussion on determinants and drivers of children’s diets. It is unclear which type of literature they focussed on and whether the results of the literature review are exhaustive. Tables which summarise the selected literature would be helpful here to provide context about the presentation of findings, as it is not clear what studies were identified and in relation to which outcomes. Furthermore, the authors should consider only presenting their own findings in the results section. They’re currently referring to other literature in the results section which is preferably positioned in the introduction/discussion section.

While the summarised conclusions are succinct, these only address part of the aim and findings, and only refer to common themes. The conclusions on drivers of young children's diets, and implications for future actions also do not represent the disparities between and within countries in the LAC region.

Lastly, while this article was generally written in an intelligible fashion and in standard English, it could still benefit from proof-reading before submitting the subsequent version as ambiguous language was used in multiple sections.

Please find below a more detailed list of the major and minor issues for the authors to consider and address in the subsequent version:

--------------

Major issues

--------------

1. Abstract

1.1. The authors present the scope of the problem, however it would be helpful if they also introduce child feeding which is currently not well-represented in the abstract.

1.2. Please state in the abstract that you’ve conducted a descriptive analysis.

1.3. The results and conclusions focus on key themes, however not all of these are common, based on the findings. There is limited information on disparities between and within countries for nutrition, and diet outcomes and related determinants/drivers.

1.4. The concepts presented in the key findings would benefit from more detail. For example, from reading the abstract it is unclear what type of “inequality” the authors refer to.

2. Introduction

2.1. The introduction is missing a section which signifies the need for this study. While the authors do a good job of setting the stage, a section which summarises the latest evidence, and how their work is filling a gap would be helpful here. There is also no rationale for the need of a literature review, or this is hidden in your wording. Please make this explicit in your introduction.

2.2. It is currently unclear what the authors mean with “determinants” and “drivers”. Please clarify the difference in the introduction. This terminology is also not consistently used in the remainder of the article.

2.3. The research aim is not comprehensive in its current state. For example, the aim does not capture the author’s descriptive analysis. Consider formulating a list of multiple sub-questions/objectives which link to the used methods.

2.4. Line 38, the authors state they used a mixed-methods approach but do not explicitly state what they mean by this. Based on the analysis and presentation of the findings this is a multiple methods study. There is no merging, integrating or embedding of the different research methods.

3. Methods

Descriptive analysis

3.1. It is currently unclear where the authors retrieved the malnutrition rates from. The reference directs me to child feeding statistics. Please clarify this.

3.2. The methods section currently misses a paragraph which provides a justification for the selected data sources for the descriptive analysis. It would be helpful to present an overview of current publicly available data sources on child nutrition and diets.

3.3. Please specify which software and commands you’ve used to conduct the descriptive analysis.

Literature review

3.4. It is currently unclear what type of desk-based literature review is conducted. Please clarify this, and the appropriate supplementary materials including a guideline (e.g. PRISMA).

3.5. Please list all visited databases and used search terms so that others will be able to replicate this review. It would also be helpful to supplement a table which includes the applied search strategy. A table which includes the used term translations would also be very helpful for future research.

3.6. Please clarify which types of academic literature you included (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods)

Key informant interviews

3.7. Please provide more detail on the interviewing process. Will there be any guides attached for the reader to access? It would be valuable to see how the guides differed based on the stakeholder and supplement these with the article.

3.8. The description of the key informant interviews requires more detail. Currently, a section is missing on the recruitment process of key informants, and the taken quality measures. What did the authors do to enhance the trustworthiness of the findings (e.g., member checking, triangulation, reflexivity). Furthermore who translated the transcripts, and were any cross-translations conducted?

3.9. The authors mentioned that the analysis focussed on extracting key emerging themes across six broad topics. It would be helpful for the reader when they specify the analysis technique and include the relevant literature (e.g., thematic analysis with a framework?).

3.10. The reporting of key informant interviews should be accompanied with a Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist or Standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR) checklist.

4. Results

Descriptive statistics

4.1. I advise the authors to edit the figures by including footnotes which spell out the country names, and insert the appropriate legend labels. The statistics provided in the figures could benefit from stratification by different residential types, socio-economic status of households, and other demographic characteristics if possible.

Literature review

4.2. While this the literature review section focuses on drivers/determinants of children’s diet, the authors often refer to children’s (sometimes not mentioning this either) nutrition status which is not proposed as a study outcome in the research aim. The focus of this section should align with the proposed research aim which is to identified determinants of children’s diets as an outcome of determinants/drivers according to the UNICEF framework.

4.3. Please present the type of methods of your selected studies in appropriate tables so that the reader can assess the strength of evidence on the determinants of children’s diets. It would also be helpful if the selected tables are stratified by country and country groups based on socio-economic development (criteria used for the selection of countries for the key informant interviews)

4.4. It would greatly strengthen your analysis when you conduct a cross-comparison analysis on the different countries to bring out the disparities on drivers and actions.

4.5. Information on prevalence rates, and other statistics should either be positioned in the introduction (or discussion) to provide context, unless the identified studies presented evidence on increasing rates (for example infant/child milk-based formulas) as key determinants of children’s diets.

4.6. The authors often make general statements about countries in the region (for example, line 235). It would be very helpful when the authors specify the countries.

Key informant interviews

4.7. Contextual information for each country should ideally be positioned in the methods section (statistics on child undernutrition) when this is not a direct result of your key informant interview.

4.8. In several sections it is unclear whether a statement represents the view the a key informant, or whether this a general statement derived from literature or made by the author. Please rephrase so that this is clearer.

4.9. Consider including participant's quotes, and highlighting different and contrasting views of the key informants of each country.

4.10. The results and discussion sections which cover the key informant’s perspectives could benefit from more detail if the data allows this. For example, it would be valuable to know why there is currently a lack of inter-institutional collaboration and continuity over time in Government’s actions in [country] (line 308) , and more detail on why more progress was made under the prime minister’s responsibility (line 320) to give a few examples. This could really enrich the findings and discussion.

5. Discussion

5.1. The discussion does not contain a section on the strengths and limitations of this study. Please include this in the subsequent version.

5.2. Line 376 – are these new results? I could not locate these statements in the results. Please double-check the discussion to ensure that no new findings are introduced.

5.3. The discussion in some sections is diverging from child nutrition, it is unclear at times what the outcome of interest is. Children’s diets? Or child nutrition status? Please address this. Furthermore, much of the selected literature is not specified to children within the set age-range. This makes it difficult to allocate any of the identified drivers/determinants specific to that age group.

5.4. Some statements related to the key informant views are not supported by the findings. For example, the authors state that healthy food is more difficult to access, and more expensive, this is however not reported for all countries, and phrased differently. It would be helpful if the authors double-check this in their subsequent version. Also, please specify which countries you’re referring to when making these statements. Was this for example also mentioned for Peru? It would strengthen your findings and discussion when you highlight the differences between these countries and interpret what this means for future actions in the region.

5.5. In the discussion some countries are mentioned as examples, but it is not clear what and how the disparities are coming forward. It would greatly strengthen this article when the authors discuss these in more detail and interpret what this means for context-specific drivers and actions.

--------------

Minor issues

--------------

1. Abstract

1.1. It is unclear in some parts which age group the author’s focus on. It would be helpful for the reader when they’re informed about this when reading the abstract.

2. Introduction

2.1. Please provide more detail on the introduced concepts. For example, it would be helpful to provide definitions of the malnutrition indicators and children’s diets in the introduction.

2.2. Consider providing statistics on all forms of child nutrition, including overweight and obesity. It is well documented that most regions are facing double/triple burdens of malnutrition so my advice is to already introduce this phenomenon in the introduction and refer to the latest Lancet series on double burden of malnutrition for example.

3. Methods

3.1. Line 89 – What is meant by “secondary data analysis”? Please clarify this.

3.2. Please clarify and describe the used snowballing techniques for identif.

3.3. Did the authors use any BOOLEAN terms for your literature search? Consider stating this.

4. Results

4.1. The descriptive analysis results miss statistics on obesity. If these are not identifiable it is safer to just state overweight within-text.

4.2. The identified literature which relates to access of food, appropriate services and adequate practices is currently presented across different levels of influence (e.g., individual, household and macro-environmental levels). Consider making this explicit in your writing to make it easier for the readers to follow the narrative.

4.3. Please provide a definition of “access to adequate food”, does this also include economic and physical dimensions?

4.4. Line 173 – Consider avoiding ambiguous words such as “encouraging” and “striking” as this is open to multiple interpretations.

4.5. Line 205 – this is a very interesting comparison. Consider however positioning this in the discussion. Since you’re looking at disparities within the LAC region, you could you also tailor this example to the price of a similar plate in a higher-middle income country in the LAC region which then highlights the disparities within the region.

4.6. Line 215 – Is there any literature available on socio-economic differences within rural and urban areas for animal source food consumption? Please also refer to the literature.

4.7. Some sections in the results would benefit from more fluent transitions. For example, the identified qualitative research (refreshing that you include this type of literature!) on WASH services does not build on the previous paragrap and feels therefore isolated (line 238). Please connect this to the narrative.

4.8. Line 256 – Which policies are being referred to here? Please specify this.

4.9. Please position the table which includes the characteristics of the key informants in the Results section.

4.10. Line 284 – The rise of sugar consumption is probably not the sole reason for adoption of regulation strategies, please consider rephrasing this.

5. Discussion

5.1. Line 333 – What is meant by a “landscape analysis”? I advise not introducing new terminology in the discussion. Or introduce this type of analysis in the methods section alongside the appropriate literature.

5.2. Lines 338-344 – it is unclear whether this section refers to the descriptive analysis. Please clarify this.

5.3. New concepts and development trends are introduced, such as the triple burden of malnutrition (line 343) and dietary transition (line 338), consider presenting these in the introduction. These are well-established and backed up by a rich literature database.

5.4. Line 421 – Adopting an iterative process to programme design could be a key conclusion, however the results do not cover this strongly.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000260.r003

Decision Letter 1

Bai Li

4 Apr 2022

PGPH-D-21-00814R1

Determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin America and the Caribbean: Findings from a regional analysis

PLOS Global Public Health

Dear Dr. de Groot,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Global Public Health. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Global Public Health’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process (please see the end of this email).

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 19 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at globalpubhealth@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pgph/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bai Li, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer 1:

In this article, the authors used a mixed approach to analyze the determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region. Both desk-based literature review and qualitative interviews with key informants in four LAC countries were conducted. Their findings well summarized the key determinants and drivers for inadequate diets in LAC regions and could be used as cues for program/policy design to tackle the malnutritional problem. However, there are some major and minor concerns that should be addressed before the manuscript can be published.

First, the reason why the four countries (Guatemala, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay) were chosen for the key informant interviews needs to be stated in a clearer way. Do they sufficiently represent the dietary situation of young children in the LAC region?

Second, according to the authors, analysis of key informants interview focused on extracting key emerging themes across six broad topics was performed (Line 133-138). However, in the result (Section 3.2.) only a summary of key informant interview per country was shown. The interview results of each country should be listed in a table and categorized based on each relevant topics, so that readers could compare the results across these countries and identify the common or unique drivers and determinants.

Third, in line 44, the authors defined that “undernutrition” includes “stunting, wasting, and micronutrient deficiencies”. However, in line 341 and 343, “undernutrition” and “micronutrient deficiencies” are listed on the same hierarchy. The definition of “undernutrition” should be clearly defined and kept consistent throughout the manuscript.

In addition, there are some minor concerns:

1) Figure legends are missing. It is difficult to understand the abbreviations in Fig 2-4.

2) The color contrast for Figure 2 and 4 is not strong. Especially in figure 4, it’s difficult to determine whether the bar charts of “BOL 2016” and “PER 2016” represent “minimum diet diversity” or “minimum acceptable diet”. The color for “minimum diet diversity” or “minimum acceptable diet” is too close to be distinguished.

3) Line 28-29, the citation of this statement should be included.

4) Line 62, the full name of “ANC” should be showed when this abbreviation appears at the first time.

Reviewer 2:

------------------------------------------------------

Summary and overall impression of the research

------------------------------------------------------

This article aimed to identify determinants and drivers of children’s diets in the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region with a regional analysis. The authors address an important topic, especially given the current triple burden of malnutrition, current disparities, and budgetary constraints within the LAC region which urge for context-specific understanding and actions. This article holds much promise, and the authors are off to a good start as they employ multiple methods, and make use of a helpful framework to guide the identification of drivers, and structuring of recommended actions. Furthermore, they selected and interviewed key informants of different organisations and levels of influence, of multiple countries which differ in terms of socio-economic and demographic development within the LAC region. The authors share several very interesting and important contextual insights on drivers of children's diet, and actions for addressing the double (or triple) burden of malnutrition in the LAC region.

There are however multiple issues throughout this article which require major revision.

In the introduction, the authors make a strong argument for focussing on disparities within the LAC region, however there is limited and inconsistent continuation of this perspective in the remainder of the article. Most importantly, the formulated research aim does not fully capture all study components. The authors are advised to formulate a list of multiple sub-questions/objectives which represent all utilised study methods. Furthermore, some of the concepts such as determinants/drivers and children’s diet are not well-defined, and used interchangeably which makes it difficult for the reader to extrapolate the key findings and conclusions.

The methods section is clearly structured, and the analysis approach of key informant data is well-described. However, this section currently does not contain sufficient detail for the author’s study to be accurately replicated by other researchers. Furthermore, this article currently reads as a “multiple methods” study instead of a “mixed-methods” study. There is currently no integration, merging or embedding of the different data sources. Also, a more detailed description on data and methodological triangulation processes would increase the credibility and validity of research findings. Lastly, the process of obtaining ethical consent currently lacks detail.

The overall lack detail in the methods section translates into a fairly chaotic presentation of the results and discussion on determinants and drivers of children’s diets. It is unclear which type of literature they focussed on and whether the results of the literature review are exhaustive. Tables which summarise the selected literature would be helpful here to provide context about the presentation of findings, as it is not clear what studies were identified and in relation to which outcomes. Furthermore, the authors should consider only presenting their own findings in the results section. They’re currently referring to other literature in the results section which is preferably positioned in the introduction/discussion section.

While the summarised conclusions are succinct, these only address part of the aim and findings, and only refer to common themes. The conclusions on drivers of young children's diets, and implications for future actions also do not represent the disparities between and within countries in the LAC region.

Lastly, while this article was generally written in an intelligible fashion and in standard English, it could still benefit from proof-reading before submitting the subsequent version as ambiguous language was used in multiple sections.

Please find below a more detailed list of the major and minor issues for the authors to consider and address in the subsequent version:

--------------

Major issues

--------------

1. Abstract

1.1. The authors present the scope of the problem, however it would be helpful if they also introduce child feeding which is currently not well-represented in the abstract.

1.2. Please state in the abstract that you’ve conducted a descriptive analysis.

1.3. The results and conclusions focus on key themes, however not all of these are common, based on the findings. There is limited information on disparities between and within countries for nutrition, and diet outcomes and related determinants/drivers.

1.4. The concepts presented in the key findings would benefit from more detail. For example, from reading the abstract it is unclear what type of “inequality” the authors refer to.

2. Introduction

2.1. The introduction is missing a section which signifies the need for this study. While the authors do a good job of setting the stage, a section which summarises the latest evidence, and how their work is filling a gap would be helpful here. There is also no rationale for the need of a literature review, or this is hidden in your wording. Please make this explicit in your introduction.

2.2. It is currently unclear what the authors mean with “determinants” and “drivers”. Please clarify the difference in the introduction. This terminology is also not consistently used in the remainder of the article.

2.3. The research aim is not comprehensive in its current state. For example, the aim does not capture the author’s descriptive analysis. Consider formulating a list of multiple sub-questions/objectives which link to the used methods.

2.4. Line 38, the authors state they used a mixed-methods approach but do not explicitly state what they mean by this. Based on the analysis and presentation of the findings this is a multiple methods study. There is no merging, integrating or embedding of the different research methods.

3. Methods

Descriptive analysis

3.1. It is currently unclear where the authors retrieved the malnutrition rates from. The reference directs me to child feeding statistics. Please clarify this.

3.2. The methods section currently misses a paragraph which provides a justification for the selected data sources for the descriptive analysis. It would be helpful to present an overview of current publicly available data sources on child nutrition and diets.

3.3. Please specify which software and commands you’ve used to conduct the descriptive analysis.

Literature review

3.4. It is currently unclear what type of desk-based literature review is conducted. Please clarify this, and the appropriate supplementary materials including a guideline (e.g. PRISMA).

3.5. Please list all visited databases and used search terms so that others will be able to replicate this review. It would also be helpful to supplement a table which includes the applied search strategy. A table which includes the used term translations would also be very helpful for future research.

3.6. Please clarify which types of academic literature you included (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods)

Key informant interviews

3.7. Please provide more detail on the interviewing process. Will there be any guides attached for the reader to access? It would be valuable to see how the guides differed based on the stakeholder and supplement these with the article.

3.8. The description of the key informant interviews requires more detail. Currently, a section is missing on the recruitment process of key informants, and the taken quality measures. What did the authors do to enhance the trustworthiness of the findings (e.g., member checking, triangulation, reflexivity). Furthermore who translated the transcripts, and were any cross-translations conducted?

3.9. The authors mentioned that the analysis focussed on extracting key emerging themes across six broad topics. It would be helpful for the reader when they specify the analysis technique and include the relevant literature (e.g., thematic analysis with a framework?).

3.10. The reporting of key informant interviews should be accompanied with a Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist or Standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR) checklist.

4. Results

Descriptive statistics

4.1. I advise the authors to edit the figures by including footnotes which spell out the country names, and insert the appropriate legend labels. The statistics provided in the figures could benefit from stratification by different residential types, socio-economic status of households, and other demographic characteristics if possible.

Literature review

4.2. While this the literature review section focuses on drivers/determinants of children’s diet, the authors often refer to children’s (sometimes not mentioning this either) nutrition status which is not proposed as a study outcome in the research aim. The focus of this section should align with the proposed research aim which is to identified determinants of children’s diets as an outcome of determinants/drivers according to the UNICEF framework.

4.3. Please present the type of methods of your selected studies in appropriate tables so that the reader can assess the strength of evidence on the determinants of children’s diets. It would also be helpful if the selected tables are stratified by country and country groups based on socio-economic development (criteria used for the selection of countries for the key informant interviews)

4.4. It would greatly strengthen your analysis when you conduct a cross-comparison analysis on the different countries to bring out the disparities on drivers and actions.

4.5. Information on prevalence rates, and other statistics should either be positioned in the introduction (or discussion) to provide context, unless the identified studies presented evidence on increasing rates (for example infant/child milk-based formulas) as key determinants of children’s diets.

4.6. The authors often make general statements about countries in the region (for example, line 235). It would be very helpful when the authors specify the countries.

Key informant interviews

4.7. Contextual information for each country should ideally be positioned in the methods section (statistics on child undernutrition) when this is not a direct result of your key informant interview.

4.8. In several sections it is unclear whether a statement represents the view the a key informant, or whether this a general statement derived from literature or made by the author. Please rephrase so that this is clearer.

4.9. Consider including participant's quotes, and highlighting different and contrasting views of the key informants of each country.

4.10. The results and discussion sections which cover the key informant’s perspectives could benefit from more detail if the data allows this. For example, it would be valuable to know why there is currently a lack of inter-institutional collaboration and continuity over time in Government’s actions in [country] (line 308) , and more detail on why more progress was made under the prime minister’s responsibility (line 320) to give a few examples. This could really enrich the findings and discussion.

5. Discussion

5.1. The discussion does not contain a section on the strengths and limitations of this study. Please include this in the subsequent version.

5.2. Line 376 – are these new results? I could not locate these statements in the results. Please double-check the discussion to ensure that no new findings are introduced.

5.3. The discussion in some sections is diverging from child nutrition, it is unclear at times what the outcome of interest is. Children’s diets? Or child nutrition status? Please address this. Furthermore, much of the selected literature is not specified to children within the set age-range. This makes it difficult to allocate any of the identified drivers/determinants specific to that age group.

5.4. Some statements related to the key informant views are not supported by the findings. For example, the authors state that healthy food is more difficult to access, and more expensive, this is however not reported for all countries, and phrased differently. It would be helpful if the authors double-check this in their subsequent version. Also, please specify which countries you’re referring to when making these statements. Was this for example also mentioned for Peru? It would strengthen your findings and discussion when you highlight the differences between these countries and interpret what this means for future actions in the region.

5.5. In the discussion some countries are mentioned as examples, but it is not clear what and how the disparities are coming forward. It would greatly strengthen this article when the authors discuss these in more detail and interpret what this means for context-specific drivers and actions.

--------------

Minor issues

--------------

1. Abstract

1.1. It is unclear in some parts which age group the author’s focus on. It would be helpful for the reader when they’re informed about this when reading the abstract.

2. Introduction

2.1. Please provide more detail on the introduced concepts. For example, it would be helpful to provide definitions of the malnutrition indicators and children’s diets in the introduction.

2.2. Consider providing statistics on all forms of child nutrition, including overweight and obesity. It is well documented that most regions are facing double/triple burdens of malnutrition so my advice is to already introduce this phenomenon in the introduction and refer to the latest Lancet series on double burden of malnutrition for example.

3. Methods

3.1. Line 89 – What is meant by “secondary data analysis”? Please clarify this.

3.2. Please clarify and describe the used snowballing techniques for identif.

3.3. Did the authors use any BOOLEAN terms for your literature search? Consider stating this.

4. Results

4.1. The descriptive analysis results miss statistics on obesity. If these are not identifiable it is safer to just state overweight within-text.

4.2. The identified literature which relates to access of food, appropriate services and adequate practices is currently presented across different levels of influence (e.g., individual, household and macro-environmental levels). Consider making this explicit in your writing to make it easier for the readers to follow the narrative.

4.3. Please provide a definition of “access to adequate food”, does this also include economic and physical dimensions?

4.4. Line 173 – Consider avoiding ambiguous words such as “encouraging” and “striking” as this is open to multiple interpretations.

4.5. Line 205 – this is a very interesting comparison. Consider however positioning this in the discussion. Since you’re looking at disparities within the LAC region, you could you also tailor this example to the price of a similar plate in a higher-middle income country in the LAC region which then highlights the disparities within the region.

4.6. Line 215 – Is there any literature available on socio-economic differences within rural and urban areas for animal source food consumption? Please also refer to the literature.

4.7. Some sections in the results would benefit from more fluent transitions. For example, the identified qualitative research (refreshing that you include this type of literature!) on WASH services does not build on the previous paragrap and feels therefore isolated (line 238). Please connect this to the narrative.

4.8. Line 256 – Which policies are being referred to here? Please specify this.

4.9. Please position the table which includes the characteristics of the key informants in the Results section.

4.10. Line 284 – The rise of sugar consumption is probably not the sole reason for adoption of regulation strategies, please consider rephrasing this.

5. Discussion

5.1. Line 333 – What is meant by a “landscape analysis”? I advise not introducing new terminology in the discussion. Or introduce this type of analysis in the methods section alongside the appropriate literature.

5.2. Lines 338-344 – it is unclear whether this section refers to the descriptive analysis. Please clarify this.

5.3. New concepts and development trends are introduced, such as the triple burden of malnutrition (line 343) and dietary transition (line 338), consider presenting these in the introduction. These are well-established and backed up by a rich literature database.

5.4. Line 421 – Adopting an iterative process to programme design could be a key conclusion, however the results do not cover this strongly.

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLOS Glob Public Health. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000260.r005

Decision Letter 2

Bai Li, Julia Robinson

9 Jun 2022

Determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin America and the Caribbean: Findings from a regional analysis

PGPH-D-21-00814R2

Dear Dr. de Groot,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Determinants and drivers of young children’s diets in Latin America and the Caribbean: Findings from a regional analysis' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Global Public Health.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact globalpubhealth@plos.org.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Global Public Health.

Best regards,

Bai Li, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Global Public Health

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Text. Literature review search strategy.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Text. Figures with disaggregated data.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Text. SRQR checklist.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Text. Questionnaire on inclusivity.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Data. Data Figs 2–4.

    (ZIP)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: LACRO regional analysis PLOS GPH - Response to reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: LAC regional analysis PLOS GPH - Response to editor.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    Data used in the manuscript to construct Figs 2–4 are publicly available through data.unicef.org. For sake of transparency, we have included the data needed to generate Figs 2–4 as well as the figures in S2 Text as a supplementary file to the manuscript. Primary data collection for this study involved in-depth interviews with selected key informants. Although ethical approval was not required for this type of study, as employees or affiliates of Maastricht University, the authors were bound by the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (https://www.nwo.nl/en/netherlands-code-conduct-research-integrity). This Code encourages researchers to make their research findings and data public upon completion of research, while establishing valid reasons should this not be possible. The Code lists ‘confidentiality’ as a valid reason for non-disclosure of research data. In our consent procedure (now included in our submission as appendix C), we assured informants that their responses will not be traceable to them personally by stating: “Your name and other information that could identify you will not be used on any study documents. In the reports and other publications that we make about this study, we may use a quote from your interview but we will not identify who you are.” Hence, we are not able to make these transcripts public due to ethical reasons. In addition, we are not able to make (excerpts) of transcripts available to interested outside parties on request since our consent procedure also assured participants that “We will not share your answers with anyone beyond the research team.” That being said, we have included selected excerpts of the interviews (quotes) in the current manuscript, section 3.2, and excerpts will be included in the full study report to be published by UNICEF in the near future.


    Articles from PLOS Global Public Health are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES