Food insecurity and mental health outcomes among homeless adults: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This review summarises and synthesises the existing literature on the relationship between food insecurity (FS) and mental health conditions among adult individuals experiencing homelessness. DESIGN: Scoping review. Papers published between 1 January 2008 and 2 November 2018, searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL, using homelessness, food security and mental health keywords. SETTING: Global evidence. PARTICIPANTS: Homeless adults aged 18 years or more. RESULTS: Nine articles (eight cross-sectional and one longitudinal) were included in the present review. FS was measured using the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale, the United States Department of Agriculture Household Food Security Survey Module, as well as single-item or constructed measures. Depression and depressive symptoms were the most common mental health conditions studied. Other mental health conditions assessed included alcohol and substance use, emotional disorders, mental health problems symptoms severity and psychiatric hospitalisations. Composite measures such as axis I and II categories and a cluster of severe mental conditions and mental health-related functioning status were also analysed. FS and mental health-related problems were considered as both exposure and outcome variables. The existing evidence suggests a potential association between FS and several mental health conditions, particularly depression, mental health symptoms severity and poor mental health status scores. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests the potential association between some mental health conditions and FS among homeless adults. However, there is a need for more longitudinal- and interventional-based studies, in order to understand the nature and directionality of the links between FS and mental health in this population group.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".