MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092354374 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckaa166.1191

The Pathway Study: Commonalities Across New Food Bank Users in Rural, Suburban and Urban Areas

2020· article· en· W3092354374 on OpenAlexaffabout
Federico Roncarolo, Geneviève Mercille, J O'Loughlin, Mylène Riva, Marie‐Pierre Sylvestre, Elsury Johanna Pérez, Louise Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRural areaMental healthEnvironmental healthFood securityGeographyScale (ratio)SocioeconomicsMedicineGerontologyDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Few studies investigate long-term effects of food donation programs on food insecurity, diet, social integration or health. We describe household food insecurity (HFI), health, social integration and sociodemographic characteristics of 1003 new food banks users in rural, suburban and urban areas in Quebec, Canada. Methods Adults requesting food aid for the first time in the past 6 months were recruited in 117 food aid organizations (32 in rural, 35 in suburban, 50 in urban areas) using a nested sampling technique. Baseline data were collected from Sept 2018 to Jan 2020 in computer-assisted face-to-face interviews. Participants will be followed biennially. HFI was assessed with the 18-item Household Food Security Survey Module. Perceived physical and mental health scores were assessed with the SF12V2 module. Psychological distress and social integration were assessed with the Kessler scale K6+ and a modified version of MSPSS Scale. Differences across groups were tested with Chi square, ANOVA and post-hoc tests. Results Most participants reported high levels of materiel deprivation, with some variability across settings. Severe HFI was more prevalent in rural (51%) and urban (47%) areas than in suburbs (38%). More urban participants reported <20000 CAN$/yr (79% vs 74% in suburbs and 69% in rural) although low education level was more prevalent in rural areas (82% reported <12th grade education vs. 67% in suburban and 64% in urban areas). Psychological distress was higher in the suburbs (28%) compared to urban (21%) or rural areas (22%). No differences were detected across settings in social integration or physical or mental health scores. Conclusions New users of food banks report markedly high levels of material, social and health-related deprivation. In-depth analyses will permit more meaningful interpretation of these differences. The Pathways Study will permit better understanding of the life experience of persons requesting food assistance. Key messages People demanding food aid for the first time reported high levels of materiel deprivation, with some variability across settings. Severe housefold insecurity is around 50% among new food aid demanders in rural and urban settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.342
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.089 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207