Initiatives and exposures associated with food security in remote and isolated communities: a scoping review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Chronic household food insecurity (HFI) and lack of food availability and accessibility in isolated communities are longstanding public health crises. This review aims to paint a more fulsome picture of food security initiatives in remote and isolated communities by examining programs across circumpolar countries, Australia, and Aotearoa New Zealand. This synthesis of research will contribute to an understanding of what types of initiatives exist and aid in the identification of best practices. METHODS: The authors conducted a scoping review identifying articles that include either (1) an evaluation of an initiative with a quantitative food security outcome in remote and isolated communities, or (2) quantitative associations between exposure factors with food security outcomes. Inclusion criteria included English and French articles focused on remote and isolated communities in Canada, the US, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Greenland, and Russia from January 1997 to July 2022. RESULTS: The article search yielded 1882 results, of which 96 fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 26 studies evaluating initiatives, 66 studies evaluating exposure factors, and four studies that included both initiatives and exposure factors. The majority of the studies included in this review were conducted in Canada and Australia. No initiative studies conducted in Russia, Greenland, Norway, Finland, or Sweden fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in this review. The most common types of initiatives evaluated included school-based programs, market subsidies, and education initiatives, though a small number (<5) of other programs were evaluated, including traditional food programs and greenhouses. Though multiple programs resulted in lower food costs or increases in healthy food consumption in remote regions, the cost of a healthy diet in these areas remained high, as do levels of HFI. Factors associated with improved food security outcomes included higher income level, access to adequate housing, higher education level, access to transportation for harvesting, and the level of remoteness of a community. The studies included in this review also stressed the importance of access to and affordability of harvesting traditional foods in these regions. CONCLUSION: Those living in remote and isolated communities are particularly vulnerable to food insecurity and lack of access and availability of healthy foods, which are compounded by a variety of socioeconomic factors. This study highlights the lack of quantitative evaluations of food security initiatives in remote and isolated communities, as well as the wide variety in measured outcomes. Authors of several of the included articles note that community-led initiatives, with strong partnerships and local champions, were recommended in these populations, given the culturally and geographically diverse groups living in remote and isolated areas.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».