Table 2.
Distribution of treatment variables and incidence of child stunting across districts
| Different treatment variable | Howrah | UD | Total | Chi square statistic for district‐wise difference testa |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T 1: % of children with access to ICDS | 51.46 | 43.71 | 48.46 | 2.23 (0.135) |
| T 2 :% children who go to ICDS for last 6 months | 35.98 | 27.81 | 32.82 | 2.80* (0.094) |
| T 3 :% children who went to ICDS for 4 or more days preceding week | 23.43 | 18.54 | 21.54 | 1.31 (0.253) |
| T 4 :% of children who received eggs for more than 3 days a week | 48.95 | 31.13 | 42.05 | 12.07*** (0.001) |
| T 5 :% of children whose mother received information about child nutrition from AWW | 18.83 | 16.56 | 17.95 | 0.32 (0.569) |
| T 6 :% of children whose mother received information about child's growth process from AWW | 17.57 | 15.89 | 16.92 | 0.18 (0.667) |
| Incidence of child stunting captured by HAZ scores | 47.70 | 51.66 | 50.77 | 0.58 (0.446) |
| Incidence of severe malnourishment (SAM) captured by MUAC | 2.93 | 3.31 | 3.08 | 0.04 (0.831) |
AWWs = Anganwari workers; ICDS = integrated child development scheme; HAZ = height‐for‐age z score.
a
Chi square statistics and respective p values are reported in parenthesis.
***
Significant at 1% level.
**
Significant at 5% level.
*
Significant at 10% level.
Source: Analysis of primary data