Table 2. Mean total, non-farmed and farmed fish consumption (g/AME/day, % of total fish) over time.
| 1991 | 2000 | 2010 | Change 1991–2010 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean [% of total fish] | SE | Mean [% of total fish] | SE | Mean [% of total fish] | SE | g/AME/day | % ‡ | |
| Total fish | ||||||||
| National | 52.5 | 1.9 | 53.7§ | 1.3 | 68.2* | 1.2 | +15.7† | 30 |
| Location | ||||||||
| Rural | 49.5 | 2.2 | 53.8§ | 1.5 | 63.9* | 1.3 | +14.5† | 29 |
| Urban | 72.0 | 3.1 | 53.5* | 2.5 | 80.0†† | 1.9 | +8.0† | 11 |
| Poverty group | ||||||||
| Extreme poor | 33.7 | 1.8 | 37.2§ | 1.2 | 40.0§ | 1.1 | +6.3† | 19 |
| Moderate poor | 51.5 | 2.2 | 51.1 | 1.8 | 53.2§ | 1.3 | +1.7§ | 3 |
| Non-poor | 69.6 | 2.5 | 66.0 | 1.5 | 77.7* | 1.2 | +8.1† | 12 |
| Non-farmed fish | ||||||||
| National | 50.4 [96] | 1.9 | 37.6* [70] | 1.2 | 33.8* [49] | 0.9 | -16.6† | -33 |
| Location | ||||||||
| Rural | 47.4 [96] | 2.1 | 37.5* [70] | 1.4 | 30.6* [48] | 1.0 | -16.8† | -35 |
| Urban | 69.4 [96] | 3.1 | 37.8* [71] | 2.0 | 42.2§ [53] | 1.6 | -27.2† | -39 |
| Poverty status | ||||||||
| Extreme poor | 32.6 [97] | 1.7 | 27.8** [75] | 1.1 | 21.3* [53] | 0.7 | -11.3† | -35 |
| Moderate poor | 49.9 [97] | 2.2 | 37.9* [74] | 1.8 | 25.7* [48] | 0.9 | -24.2† | -49 |
| Non-poor | 66.4 [95] | 2.5 | 44.4* [67] | 1.4 | 38.2* [49] | 1.0 | -28.2† | -43 |
| Farmed fish | ||||||||
| National | 2.1 [4] | 0.2 | 16.1* [30] | 0.6 | 34.5* [51] | 0.7 | +32.4† | - |
| Location | ||||||||
| Rural | 2.0 [4] | 0.3 | 16.2* [30] | 0.7 | 33.3* [52] | 0.8 | +31.3† | - |
| Urban | 2.6 [4] | 0.3 | 15.7* [29] | 1.2 | 37.7* [47] | 1.1 | +35.2† | - |
| Poverty status | ||||||||
| Extreme poor | 1.1 [3] | 0.2 | 9.4* [25] | 0.5 | 18.7* [47] | 0.7 | +17.6† | - |
| Moderate poor | 1.6 [3] | 0.3 | 13.2* [26] | 0.7 | 27.5* [52] | 0.9 | +25.9† | - |
| Non-poor | 3.2 [5] | 0.4 | 21.6* [33] | 0.8 | 39.5* [51] | 0.7 | +36.4† | - |
SE, standard error; AME, adult male equivalent.
Means adjusted for clustering and sample weights. n = 25,425. Significance of sensitivity analysis only noted when different from main analysis.
* Significantly different from previous survey year at P<0.01.
** Significantly different from previous survey year at P<0.05.
† 2010 mean is significantly different from 1991 mean at P<0.01.
†† 2010 mean is significantly different from 1991 mean at P<0.05.
‡ Change (%) not calculated when baseline in 1991 was less than 5 g/AME/day.
§ In sensitivity analysis, median intake was significantly different than median intake in previous year at P<0.05.