Household Food Insecurity and Canadian Aboriginal Women’s: Self-efficacy in Food Preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Determinants of self-efficacy related to food preparation using store-bought food were examined in women belonging to the Atikamekw Nation. Also examined was whether self-efficacy was associated with household food insecurity. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 107 women responsible for household food supplies. Two self-efficacy scores were calculated, one for healthy food preparation and one for food preparation in general. Household food insecurity was measured with an adapted version of the United States Food Security Core Module. The other variables were household composition, income sources, food supplies, tobacco use, participants' health status, and lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics. Multiple linear regression was used to analyze associations between self-efficacy and household food insecurity in 99 participants. RESULTS: Severe household food insecurity was associated with significantly lower healthy food preparation scores in Atikamekw women. Other associated variables were food supplies, marital status, alcohol consumption, weight status, and understanding of the native language. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the concept of self-efficacy contributes to a better understanding of the factors influencing food preparation in Atikamekw women. In this study, self-efficacy in healthy food preparation was linked to food insecurity and obesity, particularly in the most serious cases. Efforts to improve diet will require not only behavioural interventions, but public policies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".