Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS)

Anand Ahankari; Andrew Fogarty; Laila Tata; Puja Myles

doi:10.12688/f1000research.10556.1

Home Browse Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Note

Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS)

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Anand Ahankari ^1,2, Andrew Fogarty¹, Laila Tata¹, Puja Myles¹

PUBLISHED 09 Jan 2017

Author details Author details

¹ Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
² Halo Medical Foundation, Maharashtra, India

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

A 2015 Lancet paper by Patel et al. on healthcare access in India comprehensively discussed national health programmes where some benefits are linked with the country’s Below Poverty Line (BPL) registration scheme. BPL registration aims to support poor families by providing free/subsidised healthcare. Technical issues in obtaining BPL registration by poor families have been previously reported in the Indian literature; however there are no data on family assets of BPL registrants. Here, we provide evidence of family-level assets among BPL registration holders (and non-BPL households) using original research data from the Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS).

Social and health data from 287 pregnant women and 891 adolescent girls (representing 1178 family households) across 34 villages in Maharashtra state, India, were analysed. Several assets were shown to be similarly distributed between BPL and non-BPL households; a large proportion of families who would probably be eligible were not registered, whereas BPL-registered families often had significant assets that should not make them eligible. This is likely to be the first published evidence where asset distribution such as agricultural land, housing structures and livestock are compared between BPL and non-BPL households in a rural population. These findings may help planning BPL administration to allocate health benefits equitably, which is an integral part of national health programmes.

Keywords

India, Below Poverty Line, Healthcare benefits, Maharashtra Anaemia Study

Corresponding author: Anand Ahankari

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS) was conducted as part of Dr Anand Ahankari’s PhD programme with the University of Nottingham UK, which was sponsored by the University’s Vice Chancellor Scholarship for Research Excellence International 2013 (Tuition fee support, Ref 12031). The anaemia project conducted in Maharashtra, India, was a joint collaboration between the University of Nottingham and the Halo Medical Foundation (HMF), with the latter providing laboratory testing and data storage facilities. Project management and data collection were funded by Dr Hardikar through the Maharashtra Foundation, USA. Dr Ahankari also received a bursary from the Durga Devi Charitable Trust, India during the PhD studies.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2017 Ahankari A et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Data associated with the article are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).

How to cite: Ahankari A, Fogarty A, Tata L and Myles P. Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS) [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6:25 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10556.1) First published: 09 Jan 2017, 6:25 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10556.1) Latest published: 09 Jan 2017, 6:25 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10556.1)

Introduction

Patel et al. (2015) provided a comprehensive picture of the current Indian healthcare structure, and also mentioned the National Health Mission’s (NHM) initiative to target inequalities in healthcare access¹. Such national health programmes use the ‘Below Poverty Line’ (BPL) registration status to identify deprived families and provide them with free/subsidised healthcare services². The registration is allocated at family level, based on a scoring system calculated using family level assets such as agricultural land, housing structures, electricity supplies, household equipment. The scoring system varies within Indian states. The BPL status provides access to free healthcare facilities along with monthly access to subsidised food products including but not limited to wheat, rice, cooking oil and sugar.

There are no data on family assets of BPL registrants. Therefore, in this study, we provide evidence of family-level assets among BPL registration holders (and non-BPL households) using research data we collected previously for the Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS)^3–5. The MAS was conducted though a joint collaboration of Halo Medical Foundation (HMF), India and the University of Nottingham, UK.

Methods

The MAS was conducted to identify risk factors associated with anaemia in pregnant women (3 to 5 months gestation), and in 13 to 17 year old adolescent girls, living in 34 villages of the Osmanabad district of Maharashtra state of India. MAS collected information on health and social conditions along with blood investigations to examine anaemia risks in rural Indian communities. Additional details of the MAS project are published elsewhere^3–5.

Data collection also included information on family assets such as agricultural land, housing structure, livestock, automobiles, employment, and home electronics. In this research note, we evaluated family level assets in relation with the BPL registration. The comparison was made in BPL and non-BPL holders for each asset using Chi-square statistics in Stata Software (V.13.1, Texas, USA).

In total, 287 pregnant women and 1010 adolescent girls participated in data collection, giving an overall response rate of 95%. We selected one person per household at random for the analysis, which resulted in 287 pregnant women (Dataset 1⁶), all from unique households, and 891 adolescent girls (Dataset 2⁷). Therefore, 1178 total households across 34 villages (a population of approximately 65,500) were used in analyses. Written approval was obtained from each study participant and their guardian prior to data collection, and the same was counter signed by the primary investigator (AA). The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Government Medical College of Aurangabad, India (Reference number: Pharma/IEC/GMA/196/2014), and also by the Nottingham University Medical School Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: E10102013).

ParticipantID	BPLRegistration	AnnualIncome	FarmingLand	WaterMotorPumpatFarm	Livestock	HouseStructure	Owns3/4wheeler	Owns2WheelerMotorbike	Television	MobilePhone	SoldAssetsinRecent12months
1	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
2	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
3	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
4	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
5	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
6	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
7	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
8	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
9	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
10	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	No	No
11	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
12	No	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
13	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
14	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	No	No
15	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
16	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	No	No
17	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
18	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
19	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
20	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
21	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
22	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
23	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
24	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
26	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
27	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
28	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
29	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
30	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
31	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
32	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
33	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
34	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
35	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
36	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	No	No
37	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
38	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
39	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
40	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
41	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
42	No	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
43	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
44	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
45	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
46	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
47	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
48	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
49	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
50	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
51	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
52	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
53	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
54	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
55	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
56	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
57	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
58	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
59	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	No	No
60	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
61	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
62	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
63	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
64	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
65	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
66	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
67	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
68	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
69	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
70	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
71	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
72	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
73	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
74	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	No	No
75	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
76	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
77	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
78	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
79	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
80	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
81	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
82	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
83	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
84	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
85	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
86	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
87	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
88	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
89	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
92	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
93	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
94	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
95	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
96	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
97	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
98	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No
99	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
100	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
101	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
102	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
103	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
104	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
105	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
106	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithTemporaryHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
107	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
108	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
109	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
110	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
111	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
112	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
113	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	No	Yes	No
114	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
115	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
116	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
117	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
118	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
119	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
120	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
121	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
122	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
123	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
124	No	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
125	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
126	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
127	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
130	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
131	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	No	Yes
132	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	No	No
133	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
134	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
135	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
136	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
137	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
138	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
139	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
140	No	Above100001INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
141	No	Above100001INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
142	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
143	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
144	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	No	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
145	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
146	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
147	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No
148	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
149	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
150	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
151	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
152	No	Above100001INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
153	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
154	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
155	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
156	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
157	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
158	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
159	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
160	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
161	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
162	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
163	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
164	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
165	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
166	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
167	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
168	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
169	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
170	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
171	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
172	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
173	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
174	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
175	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
176	No	Above100001INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
177	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
178	No	Above100001INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
179	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
180	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
181	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
182	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
184	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
185	No	Lessthan50000INR	>5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
186	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
188	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
189	No	Between50001to100000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
190	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
191	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
192	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
193	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
194	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	Yes
195	No	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
196	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
197	No	Above100001INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
198	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
199	Yes	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
200	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
201	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No	Yes	No
202	No	Lessthan50000INR	NoFarmingLand	No	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
203	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
205	Yes	Lessthan50000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	No	No	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes	Yes	No
206	No	Between50001to100000INR	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
207	No	Between50001to100000INR	>5AcresofLand	Yes	Yes	ParticipantswithSemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
This is a portion of the data; to view all the data, please download the file.

Dataset 1.Pregnant Women MAS Project.

The data has 287 pregnant women participants with self-explanatory variables on BPL registration, and related assets analysed in the paper.

ParticipantID	BPLRegistration	FarmingLand	Livestock	HouseStructure	Television	MobilePhone	TemporallyEmployed
3	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
4	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
5	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
6	Yes	NoFarmingLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
7	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
8	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
9	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
10	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
11	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
12	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
13	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
14	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
15	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
16	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
17	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
18	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
19	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
20	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
21	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
22	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
23	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	TemporaryHouse	Yes	Yes	No
24	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
25	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
26	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
27	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
28	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
29	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
30	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
31	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
32	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
34	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
35	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
37	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
38	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
39	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	No	No	No
40	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes
41	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
42	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
43	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
45	No	NoFarmingLand	No	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
46	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
47	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
49	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
50	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
51	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
52	No	NoFarmingLand	No	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
53	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
54	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
55	No	NoFarmingLand	No	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
56	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
57	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
58	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
59	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
60	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
61	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
63	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
64	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
65	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
66	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
67	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
68	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
69	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
70	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
71	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
73	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
74	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
75	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
76	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
77	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
78	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
79	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
80	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
81	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
82	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
83	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	No	Yes
84	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
85	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
86	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
87	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
88	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
89	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
91	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
92	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
93	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
94	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
95	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
96	No	NoFarmingLand	No	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
97	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
98	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
99	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
100	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
102	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
103	No	NoFarmingLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
104	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
105	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
106	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
107	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
108	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
109	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
110	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
111	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes
113	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
114	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
115	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
116	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
117	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
118	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
119	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
120	No	>5AcresofLand	No	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
121	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
122	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
123	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
124	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
125	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
126	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
127	Yes	NoFarmingLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
128	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
129	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
130	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
132	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
133	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
134	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	Yes
135	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
137	No	NoFarmingLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
138	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
140	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
141	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
142	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
143	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
144	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	TemporaryHouse	No	Yes	No
145	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
146	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
148	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
149	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
152	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
153	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
154	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
155	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
156	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
157	No	NoFarmingLand	No	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
159	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
160	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
161	Yes	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
162	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
164	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
166	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
167	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
168	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
169	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
170	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
171	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
172	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
173	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
174	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
175	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
177	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
178	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
179	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
180	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	No	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
181	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
182	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
183	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
185	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
186	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
188	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
189	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
190	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
191	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
192	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
193	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
195	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
196	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
197	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
198	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
200	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
201	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
203	No	Upto5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
204	No	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
206	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
207	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	Yes
208	No	NoFarmingLand	No	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
209	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
210	No	NoFarmingLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
211	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
216	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
217	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
220	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	No	No
221	Yes	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
222	No	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
224	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
225	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
226	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
227	No	>5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
228	No	NoFarmingLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
229	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	PermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	Yes
230	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
231	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	No	Yes	No
232	Yes	Upto5AcresofLand	Yes	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
233	Yes	>5AcresofLand	No	SemiPermanentHouse	Yes	Yes	No
This is a portion of the data; to view all the data, please download the file.

Dataset 2.Adolescent Girls MAS Project.

The data has 891 adolescent girls participants with self-explanatory variables on BPL registration, and related assets analysed in the paper.

Results

36.4% of adolescent girls (325/891), and 37.6% (108/287) pregnant women in our study had current BPL registration. 32.3% (105/325) of adolescent girl families with BPL registration had more than 5 acres of farming land, and 54.4% (177/325) had a colour television. Overall, of the 6 assets we assessed, 3 showed no significant differences in distribution (p>0.05) between BPL registered and non-registered families of adolescent girls (Table 1).

Table 1. Distribution of family assets in non-BPL and BPL registrants observed among adolescent girls and pregnant women participants living in Osmanabad district of Maharashtra, India.

I) Adolescent girls [N=891, Non-BPL registrants 566 (63.5%), and BPL registrants 325 (36.4%)]
Below Poverty Registration	Non-BPL (percentage)	BPL registrants (percentage)	P value
Asset 1: Farming land
a. No farming land	250 (44.1%)	69 (21.2%)	<0.001
b. ≤ 5 acres of land	222 (39.2%)	151 (46.4%)
c. > 5 acres of land	94 (16.6%)	105 (32.3%)+
Asset 2: Livestock
a. Without any livestock	160 (28.2%)	102 (31.3%)	0.32
b. Holds livestock	406 (71.7%)	223 (68.6%)
Asset 3: House structure
a. Participants with temporary house	2 (0.3%)*	2 (0.6%)	0.34
b. Participants with semi-permanent house	487 (86.0%)	289 (88.9%)
c. Participants with permanent house	77 (13.6%)	34 (10.4%)+
Asset 4: Television
a. No	213 (37.6%)	148 (45.5%)	0.02
b. Yes	353 (62.3%)	177 (54.4%)+
Asset 5: At least one mobile phone in the family
a. No	27 (4.7%)	28 (8.6%)	0.02
b. Yes	539 (95.2%)	297 (91.3%)
Participant temporally employed such as farm based labour work
a. Not employed	526 (92.9%)	298 (91.6%)+	0.49
b. Temporarily employed	40 (7.0%)	27 (8.3%)
II) Pregnant women [N=287, Non-BPL registrants 179 (62.4%) and BPL registrants 108 (37.6%)]
Below Poverty Registration	Non-BPL (percentage)	BPL registrants (percentage)	P value
Asset 1: Annual Income
a. Less than 50,000/- INR (500 GBP)	76 (42.4%)*	61 (56.4%)	0.006
b. Between 50,001 to 100,000/-INR (501-1000 GBP)	84 (46.9%)	45 (41.6%)+
c. Above 100,001/- INR (1001 GBP and above)	19 (10.7%)	2 (2%)+
Asset 2: Farming Land
a. No farming land	30 (16.7%)	39 (36.1%)	<0.001
b. ≤ 5 acres of land	50 (27.9%)	39 (36.1%)
c. > 5 acres of land	99 (55.4%)	30 (27.8%)+
Asset 3: Water motor pump at farm
a. No	74 (41.3%)	76 (70.3%)	<0.001
b. Yes	105 (58.7%)	32 (29.7%)+
Asset 4: Livestock
a. Without any livestock	45 (25.1%)	33 (30.5%)	0.31
b. Holds livestock	134 (74.9%)	75 (69.5%)
Asset 5: House structure
a. Participants with temporary house	1 (0.5%)*	1 (0.9%)	0.22
b. Participants with semi-permanent house	162 (90.5%)	103 (95.3%)
c. Participants with permanent house	16 (9%)	4 (3.8%)+
Asset 6: Family owns a three/four wheeler vehicle or any agricultural vehicle
a. No	151 (84.3%)	99 (91.6%)	0.07
b. Yes	28 (15.7%)	9 (8.4%)+
Asset 7: Family owns a two wheeler
a. No	110 (61.4%)	71 (65.7%)	0.46
b. Yes	69 (38.6%)	37 (34.3%)+
Asset 8: Television
a. No	50 (27.9%)	40 (37%)	0.10
b. Yes	129 (72.1%)	68 (63%)+
Asset 9: At least one mobile phone in the family
a. No	5 (2.7%)	5 (4.6%)	0.41
b. Yes	174 (97.3%)	103 (95.4%)
Any assets sold in last 12 months (such as land, livestock, agricultural tools/ equipment, house vehicle, gold or any other valuable items)
a. No	149 (83.3%)	89 (82.5%)	0.85
b. Yes	30 (16.7%)	19 (17.5%)

+: Those who are likely to be ineligible but hold BPL registration.

*: Those who appeared to be eligible but did not have registration.

Annual income is also presented in Great Britain Pound (GBP) based on the conversion rate of 1 GBP= 100 Indian Rupees (INR).

Note: Family income/assets was defined as an immediate family’s resources only. For example: for adolescent girls, it included participants’ parents’ (mother and father only) income/assets; among pregnant women, it included participants’ (pregnant woman) and husbands’ income/assets only. P values were calculated using chi square test.

Among families of pregnant women, 6 out of 9 assets assessed showed no significant differences (p>0.05) between BPL registered and non-registered. Furthermore, 2% of the families of BPL registrants (2/108) had an annual income greater than 100,000 INR (~1000 GBP), 27.8% had more than 5 acres of land (30/108), and 8.4% had three/four wheeler vehicles (9/108).

Discussion

Non-eligible families holding the BPL registration are likely to increase burden on healthcare services, while those with greatest need may remain untreated due to absence of BPL registration, or inability to pay for healthcare services out of their own pockets^2,8. Subsidising non-eligible BPL holders also increases the burden on government finances, which in light of the current fragile economic situation, is an important issue to address⁸.

We observed several participants from both study groups in the MAS, who appeared eligible for the BPL scheme, but had not obtained the registration. Many participants reported technical difficulties as the reason for not having BPL registration. Some of these technical difficulties included having problems procuring the required documents from government officials, and being unable to complete paperwork and other legal documents that are needed to submit the BPL application. This suggests a need to re-evaluate and strengthen the current BPL registration system, and also demands further monitoring to ensure that poor families in need receive vital healthcare and other subsidy benefits. The National Health Mission’s initiatives are well meant and have the potential to provide universal health coverage in India; however, implementation is challenging. Strengthening the current BPL registration system and improving identification of poor and needy families might help with achieving the universal health model. This may also help in revising the current health budget to allocate funds for the improvement of the governmental health system. We welcome the review from Patel et al. (2015) and suggest continuing evaluation of both national health projects and the BPL registration process, which will be useful in underpinning healthcare facilities whilst widening access.

Data availability

Dataset 1: Pregnant Women MAS Project. The data has 287 pregnant women participants with self-explanatory variables on BPL registration, and related assets analysed in the paper.

doi, 10.5256/f1000research.10556.d148743⁶

Dataset 2: Adolescent Girls MAS Project. The data has 891 adolescent girls participants with self-explanatory variables on BPL registration, and related assets analysed in the paper

doi, 10.5256/f1000research.10556.d148744⁷

Ethics statement

The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Government Medical College of Aurangabad, India (Reference number: Pharma/IEC/GMA/196/2014), and also by the Nottingham University Medical School Research Ethics Committee (Reference number: E10102013). All participants and their guardians provided signed informed consent for the survey and blood withdrawal separately. Each consent was countersigned by the primary investigator (AA). Other than those who declined to participate, all adolescent girls and pregnant women received a standardised health report including information on their haemoglobin level and anaemia status along with facilitated access to educational materials on anaemia through the health NGO, Halo Medical Foundation’s (HMF) village based services. Participant health reports were also provided to the village health worker/government nurse with arrangements for free consultation and assistance if any significant health problems requiring further assessment or treatment were identified during the study. HMF’s hospital was also made available for free consultation as a primary referral centre if more specialist assessment or treatment was needed. On completion of data collection, an additional reminder letter was issued to village health workers indicating details of each severe anaemic case in their village to ensure that necessary medical advice and treatment was available.

Author contributions

The MAS project was designed by AF, AA, PM and LT. The data collection, analysis and manuscript preparation was carried out by AA with additional advisory support from AF, PM and LT.

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS) was conducted as part of Dr Anand Ahankari’s PhD programme with the University of Nottingham UK, which was sponsored by the University’s Vice Chancellor Scholarship for Research Excellence International 2013 (Tuition fee support, Ref 12031). The anaemia project conducted in Maharashtra, India, was a joint collaboration between the University of Nottingham and the Halo Medical Foundation (HMF), with the latter providing laboratory testing and data storage facilities. Project management and data collection were funded by Dr Hardikar through the Maharashtra Foundation, USA. Dr Ahankari also received a bursary from the Durga Devi Charitable Trust, India during the PhD studies.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

Professor (Mr) and Mrs Chawathe, Mumbai, India provided generous support for Dr Ahankari’s study. The authors acknowledge the support of Ms. Sandhya Rankhamb in data collection, data entry, and verification, and recognise her contribution in the project. The authors thank HMF village health workers for providing field level support for this study. Support for publication of this article was obtained from the University of Nottingham, UK.

F1000 recommended

References

1. Patel V, Parikh R, Nandraj S, et al.: Assuring health coverage for all in India. Lancet. 2015; 386(10011): 2422–2435. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
2. Alkire S, Seth S: Identifying BPL Households: A Comparison of Methods. SSRN Electron J. 2012. Publisher Full Text
3. Ahankari AS, Fogarty AW, Tata LJ, et al.: Assessment of a non-invasive haemoglobin sensor NBM 200 among pregnant women in rural India. BMJ Innov. 2016; 2: 70–77. Publisher Full Text
4. Ahankari AS, Myles PR, Fogarty AW, et al.: Prevalence of iron deficiency anaemia and risk factors in 1,010 adolescent girls from rural Maharashtra, India: a cross-sectional survey. Public Health. 2017; 142: 159–166. Publisher Full Text
5. Ahankari AS, Dixit JV, Fogarty AW, et al.: Comparison of the NBM 200 non-invasive haemoglobin sensor with Sahli’s hemometer among adolescent girls in rural India. BMJ Innov. 2016; 2: 144–148. Publisher Full Text
6. Ahankari A, Fogarty A, Tata L, et al.: Dataset 1 in: Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS). F1000Research. 2017. Data Source
7. Ahankari A, Fogarty A, Tata L, et al.: Dataset 2 in: Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS). F1000Research. 2017. Data Source
8. Mishra RK, Raveendran J, editors: Millennium Development Goals: The Indian Journey. New Delhi: Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd. 2011; 279. Reference Source

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 09 Jan 2017

Author details Author details

¹ Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
² Halo Medical Foundation, Maharashtra, India

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

Article Versions (1)

version 1

Published: 09 Jan 2017, 6:25

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10556.1

© 2017 Ahankari A et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Data associated with the article are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Ahankari A, Fogarty A, Tata L and Myles P. Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS) [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6:25 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10556.1)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 09 Jan 2017

Views

Reviewer Report 06 Feb 2017

Umesh Wadgave, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India

Mahesh Khairnar, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.11375.r19814

It’s an interesting and valid research tapping the vital topic of distribution of BPL cards in India. Overall methodology of the research is sound.

There are certain issues which require clarification from authors

The assets considered for issuing BPL cards in Maharashtra state are quite different from assets considered in the present study ( For details follow this link http://mahafood.gov.in/website/english/PDS.aspx). These differences should be considered before making recommendations about policy change in BPL card distribution.
Authors state that “Overall, of the 6 assets we assessed, 3 showed no significant differences in distribution (p>0.05) between BPL registered and non-registered families of adolescent girls (Table 1).” But all the three assets which didn’t show significant difference are not listed in criteria to issue BPL Cards as per Maharashtra State.
Table 1 shows that about 44% of Non-BPL holders don’t have farming land which is far more than BPL card holders where only 21% don’t have farming land. However, in Table 2 it’s just opposite where 16.7% Non-BPL holders and 36.1 % BPL holders don’t have farming land. This contradicting finding needs to be justified in the discussion.
Why different assets were considered for adolescent girls (5 assets) and pregnant women (9 assets).
What is the necessity to stratify the analysis for adolescent girls and pregnant women separately? Authors could have clubbed the data and did the analysis which will increase the power of the study.
The sample for the present study consists of households having adolescent girls and pregnant women which will limit the generalizability of the study findings. Hence, the issue of generalizability of study findings should be discussed.
In the discussion, it is necessary to discuss study limitations and future scope of doing research on this topic.

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 27 Mar 2017

Anand Ahankari, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

27 Mar 2017

Author Response

Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding ... Continue reading Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding comment 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7: This paper used a retrospective dataset available from Maharashtra Anaemia Study, where the primary objective was to identify risk factors associated with adolescent and pregnancy anaemia in rural population of Maharashtra state of India. We had limited data on social class and family assets, which was used against the BPL status in the analysis. We agree that our variables are different compared to the listed BPL indicators. Nevertheless, our data reported discrepancies in the current BPL status, which is an incidental finding. We suggested to investigate the current challenges in the BPL administration to ensure appropriate allocation and monitoring. We have not suggested any policy changes based on our research. We acknowledge limitations of our study, and further work is necessary to address the outlined challenges. Due to article length restrictions, we could not add more on the study strengths and limitations. We hope that readers will find this comment section useful for additional clarification.

Regarding comment 3: The article has only one table (Table 1). In this table, there are 2 sections, adolescent girls and pregnant women. Each section used different variables (from 2 individual datasets). Therefore, statistical presentations are different as presented in the Table 1 for each study group.

Regarding comment 5: As you may see in the attached datasets, we collected different set of variables from study participants, thus analysis was conducted independently for the two study groups. Data from pregnant women had more variables compared to adolescent girl dataset. Therefore, we could not combine these to form a single source.

I hope that F1000Research readers will find this section useful. Thank you once again for providing this opportunity to respond to your comments.

Dr Anand Ahankari
Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding comment 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7: This paper used a retrospective dataset available from Maharashtra Anaemia Study, where the primary objective was to identify risk factors associated with adolescent and pregnancy anaemia in rural population of Maharashtra state of India. We had limited data on social class and family assets, which was used against the BPL status in the analysis. We agree that our variables are different compared to the listed BPL indicators. Nevertheless, our data reported discrepancies in the current BPL status, which is an incidental finding. We suggested to investigate the current challenges in the BPL administration to ensure appropriate allocation and monitoring. We have not suggested any policy changes based on our research. We acknowledge limitations of our study, and further work is necessary to address the outlined challenges. Due to article length restrictions, we could not add more on the study strengths and limitations. We hope that readers will find this comment section useful for additional clarification.

Regarding comment 3: The article has only one table (Table 1). In this table, there are 2 sections, adolescent girls and pregnant women. Each section used different variables (from 2 individual datasets). Therefore, statistical presentations are different as presented in the Table 1 for each study group.

Regarding comment 5: As you may see in the attached datasets, we collected different set of variables from study participants, thus analysis was conducted independently for the two study groups. Data from pregnant women had more variables compared to adolescent girl dataset. Therefore, we could not combine these to form a single source.

I hope that F1000Research readers will find this section useful. Thank you once again for providing this opportunity to respond to your comments.

Dr Anand Ahankari
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 27 Mar 2017

Anand Ahankari, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

27 Mar 2017

Author Response

Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding ... Continue reading Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding comment 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7: This paper used a retrospective dataset available from Maharashtra Anaemia Study, where the primary objective was to identify risk factors associated with adolescent and pregnancy anaemia in rural population of Maharashtra state of India. We had limited data on social class and family assets, which was used against the BPL status in the analysis. We agree that our variables are different compared to the listed BPL indicators. Nevertheless, our data reported discrepancies in the current BPL status, which is an incidental finding. We suggested to investigate the current challenges in the BPL administration to ensure appropriate allocation and monitoring. We have not suggested any policy changes based on our research. We acknowledge limitations of our study, and further work is necessary to address the outlined challenges. Due to article length restrictions, we could not add more on the study strengths and limitations. We hope that readers will find this comment section useful for additional clarification.

Regarding comment 3: The article has only one table (Table 1). In this table, there are 2 sections, adolescent girls and pregnant women. Each section used different variables (from 2 individual datasets). Therefore, statistical presentations are different as presented in the Table 1 for each study group.

Regarding comment 5: As you may see in the attached datasets, we collected different set of variables from study participants, thus analysis was conducted independently for the two study groups. Data from pregnant women had more variables compared to adolescent girl dataset. Therefore, we could not combine these to form a single source.

I hope that F1000Research readers will find this section useful. Thank you once again for providing this opportunity to respond to your comments.

Dr Anand Ahankari
Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding comment 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7: This paper used a retrospective dataset available from Maharashtra Anaemia Study, where the primary objective was to identify risk factors associated with adolescent and pregnancy anaemia in rural population of Maharashtra state of India. We had limited data on social class and family assets, which was used against the BPL status in the analysis. We agree that our variables are different compared to the listed BPL indicators. Nevertheless, our data reported discrepancies in the current BPL status, which is an incidental finding. We suggested to investigate the current challenges in the BPL administration to ensure appropriate allocation and monitoring. We have not suggested any policy changes based on our research. We acknowledge limitations of our study, and further work is necessary to address the outlined challenges. Due to article length restrictions, we could not add more on the study strengths and limitations. We hope that readers will find this comment section useful for additional clarification.

Regarding comment 3: The article has only one table (Table 1). In this table, there are 2 sections, adolescent girls and pregnant women. Each section used different variables (from 2 individual datasets). Therefore, statistical presentations are different as presented in the Table 1 for each study group.

Regarding comment 5: As you may see in the attached datasets, we collected different set of variables from study participants, thus analysis was conducted independently for the two study groups. Data from pregnant women had more variables compared to adolescent girl dataset. Therefore, we could not combine these to form a single source.

I hope that F1000Research readers will find this section useful. Thank you once again for providing this opportunity to respond to your comments.

Dr Anand Ahankari
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 19 Jan 2017

Sunil M. Sagare, Department of Community Medicine, MIMSR Medical College, Latur, Maharashtra, India

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.11375.r19107

Authors had given importance of subject appropriately, clarified ethical considerations, self-explanatory results and well discussion on the issue.

The authors pinpointed the below poverty line (BPL) issue in the form of non-eligible BPL registrants and eligible ... Continue reading

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 06 Mar 2017

Anand Ahankari, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

06 Mar 2017

Author Response

Dear Dr Sagare,

Thank you for reviewing and submitting your comments, much appreciated.

Dr Anand Ahankari.
Competing Interests: None
Dear Dr Sagare,

Thank you for reviewing and submitting your comments, much appreciated.

Dr Anand Ahankari.
Dear Dr Sagare,

Thank you for reviewing and submitting your comments, much appreciated.

Dr Anand Ahankari.
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 06 Mar 2017

Anand Ahankari, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

06 Mar 2017

Author Response

Dear Dr Sagare,

Thank you for reviewing and submitting your comments, much appreciated.

Dr Anand Ahankari.
Competing Interests: None
Dear Dr Sagare,

Thank you for reviewing and submitting your comments, much appreciated.

Dr Anand Ahankari.
Dear Dr Sagare,

Thank you for reviewing and submitting your comments, much appreciated.

Dr Anand Ahankari.
Competing Interests: None Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 09 Jan 2017

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 1 09 Jan 17	read	read

Sunil M. Sagare, MIMSR Medical College, Latur, India
Umesh Wadgave, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, India

Mahesh Khairnar, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, India

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

23 Views

06 Feb 2017 | for Version 1

Umesh Wadgave, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India

Mahesh Khairnar, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India

23 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

The assets considered for issuing BPL cards in Maharashtra state are quite different from assets considered in the present study ( For details follow this link http://mahafood.gov.in/website/english/PDS.aspx). These differences should be considered before making recommendations about policy change in BPL card distribution.
Authors state that “Overall, of the 6 assets we assessed, 3 showed no significant differences in distribution (p>0.05) between BPL registered and non-registered families of adolescent girls (Table 1).” But all the three assets which didn’t show significant difference are not listed in criteria to issue BPL Cards as per Maharashtra State.
Table 1 shows that about 44% of Non-BPL holders don’t have farming land which is far more than BPL card holders where only 21% don’t have farming land. However, in Table 2 it’s just opposite where 16.7% Non-BPL holders and 36.1 % BPL holders don’t have farming land. This contradicting finding needs to be justified in the discussion.
Why different assets were considered for adolescent girls (5 assets) and pregnant women (9 assets).
What is the necessity to stratify the analysis for adolescent girls and pregnant women separately? Authors could have clubbed the data and did the analysis which will increase the power of the study.
The sample for the present study consists of households having adolescent girls and pregnant women which will limit the generalizability of the study findings. Hence, the issue of generalizability of study findings should be discussed.
In the discussion, it is necessary to discuss study limitations and future scope of doing research on this topic.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

27 Mar 2017

Anand Ahankari, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Dear Dr Wadgave and Dr Khairnar,

Thank you for your valuable time to review our research article. I have provided a brief response to your comments below.

Regarding comment 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7: This paper used a retrospective dataset available from Maharashtra Anaemia Study, where the primary objective was to identify risk factors associated with adolescent and pregnancy anaemia in rural population of Maharashtra state of India. We had limited data on social class and family assets, which was used against the BPL status in the analysis. We agree that our variables are different compared to the listed BPL indicators. Nevertheless, our data reported discrepancies in the current BPL status, which is an incidental finding. We suggested to investigate the current challenges in the BPL administration to ensure appropriate allocation and monitoring. We have not suggested any policy changes based on our research. We acknowledge limitations of our study, and further work is necessary to address the outlined challenges. Due to article length restrictions, we could not add more on the study strengths and limitations. We hope that readers will find this comment section useful for additional clarification.

Regarding comment 3: The article has only one table (Table 1). In this table, there are 2 sections, adolescent girls and pregnant women. Each section used different variables (from 2 individual datasets). Therefore, statistical presentations are different as presented in the Table 1 for each study group.

Regarding comment 5: As you may see in the attached datasets, we collected different set of variables from study participants, thus analysis was conducted independently for the two study groups. Data from pregnant women had more variables compared to adolescent girl dataset. Therefore, we could not combine these to form a single source.

I hope that F1000Research readers will find this section useful. Thank you once again for providing this opportunity to respond to your comments.

Dr Anand Ahankari

View more View less

Competing Interests

None

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

23 Views

19 Jan 2017 | for Version 1

Sunil M. Sagare, Department of Community Medicine, MIMSR Medical College, Latur, Maharashtra, India

23 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

Undue healthcare advantage taken by non-eligible BPL registrants
Disadvantage to needy eligible BPL families due to their non-registration.

Suggestions given for above mentioned questions are very much relevant and if implemented will help to reduce burden on government and healthcare finances as well.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Click here to access the data.

Downloaded data do not display as expected? Download the data (28.66KB)

Click here to access the data.

Downloaded data do not display as expected? Download the data (48.25KB)

[1] 1. Patel V, Parikh R, Nandraj S, et al.: Assuring health coverage for all in India. Lancet. 2015; 386(10011): 2422–2435. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[2] 2. Alkire S, Seth S: Identifying BPL Households: A Comparison of Methods. SSRN Electron J. 2012. Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Ahankari AS, Fogarty AW, Tata LJ, et al.: Assessment of a non-invasive haemoglobin sensor NBM 200 among pregnant women in rural India. BMJ Innov. 2016; 2: 70–77. Publisher Full Text

[4] 4. Ahankari AS, Myles PR, Fogarty AW, et al.: Prevalence of iron deficiency anaemia and risk factors in 1,010 adolescent girls from rural Maharashtra, India: a cross-sectional survey. Public Health. 2017; 142: 159–166. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Ahankari AS, Dixit JV, Fogarty AW, et al.: Comparison of the NBM 200 non-invasive haemoglobin sensor with Sahli’s hemometer among adolescent girls in rural India. BMJ Innov. 2016; 2: 144–148. Publisher Full Text

[6] 6. Ahankari A, Fogarty A, Tata L, et al.: Dataset 1 in: Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS). F1000Research. 2017. Data Source

[7] 7. Ahankari A, Fogarty A, Tata L, et al.: Dataset 2 in: Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS). F1000Research. 2017. Data Source

[8] 8. Mishra RK, Raveendran J, editors: Millennium Development Goals: The Indian Journey. New Delhi: Allied Publishers Pvt Ltd. 2011; 279. Reference Source

Healthcare benefits linked with Below Poverty Line registration in India: Observations from Maharashtra Anaemia Study (MAS)

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Results

Table 1. Distribution of family assets in non-BPL and BPL registrants observed among adolescent girls and pregnant women participants living in Osmanabad district of Maharashtra, India.

Discussion

Data availability

Ethics statement

Author contributions

Competing interests

Grant information

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

The problem

How to fix it

The problem

How to fix it

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated