Food security in African Canadian communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to synthesize and describe the evidence relating to food security among African Canadian communities to inform future research and health policy concerning people of African descent. INTRODUCTION: Food security denotes the timely access to nutritionally and culturally appropriate foods by individuals, families, groups, and communities. In Canada, there are vulnerable groups who experience higher rates of food insecurity, including immigrant and senior populations as well as Indigenous communities. While there is evidence describing food security among these vulnerable groups, food security among African Canadian communities remains poorly understood. The African Canadian community is an integral component of the Canadian population, yet there is a limited understanding of food security among this group. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will focus on the African Canadian population and food security, which encompasses food access, nutrition, and culturally appropriate foods. Evidence obtained from qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods studies, as well as dissertations and gray literature will be considered for inclusion. METHODS: This scoping review will be conducted in accordance the JBI scoping review methodology. A comprehensive search strategy developed by a librarian scientist will be used to locate and retrieve relevant sources. A screening tool will be used to screen titles and abstracts as well as the full text of included sources. Data will then be extracted by two independent reviewers, synthesized, and presented narratively, including tables and figures where appropriate.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".