MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386089523 · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-16393-1

The Pathways study: a cohort study of new food-aid users in rural, semi urban, and urban areas of Quebec, Canada

2023· article· en· W4386089523 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Federico Roncarolo, Geneviève Mercille, Mylène Riva, Elsury Johanna Pérez, Rosanne Blanchet, Mabel Carabalí, Marie-Pierre Sylvestre, Louise Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsUniversité du QuébecCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineEnvironmental healthBiostatisticsPublic healthCohort studyCohortDonationRural areaGerontologyEconomic growthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While considerable research has been conducted on household food insecurity (HFI), little research has examined the effects of food donation programs on users' living conditions. The Pathways study was established to investigate the long-term effects of food donation programs on food insecurity as well as other critical outcomes, such as diet, health, and social support. Herein, we describe the design of the Pathways Study and the participants' characteristics at baseline. METHODS: The Pathways study is a prospective cohort study of 1001 food-aid users in Quebec (Canada). We recruited newly registered users of food donation programs from 106 community-based food-aid organizations that partnered with the study. Baseline data were collected through face-to-face interviews from September 2018 to January 2020, with planned follow-up interviews at 12 and 24 months after enrollment. Household food insecurity, diet, food competencies, food shopping behaviors, perceived food environment, health status, social support and isolation, sociodemographic characteristics, housing conditions, negative life events, and the impacts of COVID-19 were assessed with validated questionnaires. RESULTS: The cohort included 1001 participants living in rural (n = 181), semi-urban (n = 250), and urban areas (n = 570). Overall, household food insecurity was reported as severe among 46.2% and moderate in 36.9% of participants. Severe household food insecurity was more prevalent in rural (51.4%) and urban (47.8%) areas compared to semi-urban (39%) areas. Overall, 76.1% of participants reported an annual income below C$20,000. Half (52%) had low education levels (high school or lower), 22.0% lived in single-parent households, and 52.1% lived alone. Most (62.9%) experienced at least one major financial crisis in the preceding year. CONCLUSIONS: Results show that newly registered users of food donation programs often have low-income and severe food insecurity, with major differences across geographical locations. The Pathways study is the first study designed to follow, over a 2-year period, a cohort of newly registered users of food donation programs and to quantify their trajectories of service use. Findings from the Pathways study might help adapt the community response to the strategies used by food-insecure households to feed themselves.

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)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→