Prevalence and experiences of food insecurity among immigrant women connected to perinatal programs at a community-based organization in Edmonton, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the prevalence of household food insecurity among immigrant women connected to perinatal programs offered through a community-based organization in Edmonton, and to explore their experiences in coping with food insecurity. Design/methodology/approach This study utilized a mixed methods research design. A community-based participatory research approach was used to engage health workers who were connected to immigrant women and families through the Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative in Edmonton. Through the health workers a sample of 213 immigrant women connected to their perinatal programs completed the Household Food Security Survey. Following the survey, 17 women completed semi-structured interviews which were analyzed using content analysis. Findings The vast majority of women (94 percent ( n =199)) lived in food insecure households, and 53 percent ( n =112) in severely food insecure. In semi-structured interviews, women specifically described not having enough money to buy vegetables, fruit and meat, and perceiving a lack of control over foods they ate and offered to their families. Practical implications This study highlights the need for support to be provided to immigrant families for acquiring healthy food in Canada. Originality/value The mixed methods design with a decent sample of often underrepresented research participants highlights an area in need of further research and greater support.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".