A Food Security Indicator Framework for British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food security is a determinant of health and increasingly recognized as a focus for health promotion. Led by the Population and Public Health Program, British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, this article outlines the process of development and the evidence-based conceptual framework that guides the systematic selection of food security indicators in the Province. A phased, iterative approach to develop the food security framework was adopted. Phase 1 consisted of a literature search of food security indicator models, and key informant discussions. Phase 2 consisted of modification of the model based on stakeholder consultation. The framework development occurred between January 2016 and April 2019. A structured scan of the literature found no existing conceptual frameworks specific to food security indicators in the Global North. The most relevant and frequently used frameworks for indicator reporting identified were environmental health indicator frameworks. This article presents a matrix framework based on existing environmental health indicator frameworks. It integrates environmental health causal networks (e.g., determinants-current state-impact-response) with food security elements identified as (a) individual and household food insecurity, (b) food systems, and (c) capacity. This framework contributes to food security performance monitoring in the Global North and fills an important gap in evaluating the impact of the public health response to food security. Use of this comprehensive framework can enable program planners and policy makers to be clear about where and how they are attempting to assess, influence and monitor food security, and illustrate the interconnectedness between indicators.
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 | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".