A Participatory Study of the Health and Social Impact of a Community Food Centre in Ottawa, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food insecurity is a pervasive and persistent issue across Canada, where a growing number of people are accessing food banks. Conventional food banks may offer relief for immediate needs but typically have limited capacity to address longer-term food insecurity. This paper focuses on the Parkdale Food Centre in Ottawa, ON, which provides food assistance alongside a range of programs and initiatives designed to address food insecurity and related needs in its community. This qualitative study aims to examine how participation in the programs at the Parkdale Food Centre influences the physical, mental, and social health of people who access the food centre. Semi-structured interviews and a participatory photovoice project were conducted with people who access the food centre. The results indicate that people who access the food centre perceived a positive influence of the programs on their food, health, and social needs, particularly with respect to improved access to fresh foods, connections to social and health resources, and reduced stigma. Incorporating additional food, health, and social programming into an existing food assistance program may help ameliorate elements of food insecurity and associated negative outcomes within communities impacted by this issue.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".