MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386744596 · doi:10.1186/s12889-023-16269-4

Food bank operations: review of operation research methods and challenges during COVID-19

2023· review· en· W4386744596 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematic reviewMarketingMedicinePublic relationsBusinessMEDLINEPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Food banks have played a crucial role in mitigating food insecurity in affluent countries for over four decades. Throughout the years, academics have researched food banks for a variety of operational problems, resulting in several research papers on the topic. However, despite significant academic interest, the operational challenges and optimization of food bank operations remain under-researched. This study aims to conduct a systematic literature review on food bank operations and provide evidence-based recommendations for addressing prevalent challenges, and provide decision-makers with practical recommendations. In addition, this investigation seeks to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on food bank operations. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of academic publications on food bank operations using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) in order to get a deeper comprehension of the problems confronting food bank operations. Using a keyword search strategy with the logical operators "AND" and "OR," two search methods were utilized to identify relevant articles on food bank operations management, supply chain, distribution, and production in our first search. In our second search, we discovered articles in the "Operations Research & Management Science" (OR &MS) category of Web of Science containing food bank-related keywords such as food charity, food donation, and food aid. The database searches yielded 246 hits, and the article content was scanned to eliminate irrelevant articles by removing non-English articles and duplicated studies, leaving 55 articles for further examination. Our extensive examination of Operations Research (OR) methodologies reveals that Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) models are the most commonly used methodology, followed by Linear Program (LP), Dynamic Program (DP), and Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) techniques. The key findings of this study emphasize the operational challenges food banks encountered during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, including supply chain disruptions, increased demand, and volunteer shortages. To address these issues, effective solutions, including the management of food donations and volunteer scheduling, were proposed. Our findings have practical implications for decision-makers in food bank management, highlighting the importance of adopting evidence-based solutions. Finally, Limitations and prospective research directions in food bank management are discussed, with an emphasis on the need for ongoing research in this crucial area.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.633
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.080 · 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