Do food skills protect from food insecurity? A study among asylum seekers living in Norway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Food insecurity has a high prevalence among asylum seekers living in Western countries. Previous studies suggest that food skills can protect against food insecurity. This study investigates the impact of food skills on food security and dietary diversity among refugees living in Norwegian reception centers. Methods The study has a cross-sectional research design. Eight asylum reception centers where selected and 205 asylum seekers (131 men and 74 women) were recruited through convenience sampling among the largest asylum seeking groups. We measured food skills by adopting questions from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2013 Rapid Response on Food Skills. Food skills were divided into cooking skills (ability to prepare meals) and shopping skills (ability to plan meals and budgeting). Food security was measured with the 10-item version of the Radimer/Cornell Hunger and Food Insecurity Scale. Dietary data was collected via a 24-hour recall, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) dietary diversity score was calculated to assess dietary quality. Data were analyzed with bivariate logistic analysis. Results Cooking skills and shopping skills contribute differently to food security and dietary diversity. Higher cooking skills were associated with higher dietary diversity but not with food security. Shopping skills were not associated with either food security or dietary diversity. Women had better cooking skills then men, but there were no gender differences in shopping skills. Married asylum seekers had better shopping skills than those who were not married. Conclusions Cooking skills have an impact on dietary diversity, initiatives promoting cooking skills should be encouraged. Further research is needed on what kind of purchasing skills can be useful for asylum seekers coping. Despite high food skills the level of food insecurity remained high. Initiatives addressing the multiple causes of food insecurity are needed. Key messages Food skills alone do not protect from food insecurity. Cooking skills are easier to transfer in a new food environment than shopping skills.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".