The Assessment of an Extended Set of Socio-Economic Determinants to Explain Anxiety and Uncertainty, Insufficient Quality and Food Intake of Afghan Refugees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:\nIn this study, socio-economic factors associated with Afghan refugee households' food insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty, insufficient quality and food intake were determined.\nDESIGN:\nHousehold Food Insecurity Assess Scale measurement was applied to assess food insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty, insufficient quality and insufficient food intake. Descriptive analysis and multivariable regression models were used to determine the associated factors.\nSETTING:\nThe study was carried out in urban areas of Tehran province in Iran. PARTICIPANTS: To collect data, interviews were conducted among 317 Afghan households. The questionnaire was administered via face-to-face interviews to either the breadwinner of the selected households or a member who could respond on behalf of the household.\nRESULTS:\nAbout 11·3 % of Afghan households who resettled in Tehran province were food secure, while 11·7 % were marginally, 40·7 % moderately and 36·3 % severely food insecure. Economic and financial factors were inversely and significantly associated with food insecurity. Employment, income, distance from the central market and personal saving were inversely associated with food insecurity, while other determinants, including the length of living time in Tehran, house type and the number of male and female children, had a direct association with food insecurity.\nCONCLUSIONS:\nThe associations of socio-economic factors with three categories of food insecurity differed. Elimination of occupation bans that the Iranian government imposes on refugees provides simple access to financial supports like long-term loans, and opening a bank account for refugees will benefit both Iranians and refugees.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".