MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Food Insecure Women with Lower Education Report More Health Problems in a Global Sample of Individuals

2016· article· en· W4389025890 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Dallmann, Meghan S. Miller, Hugo Melgar‐Quiñonez

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversitySte. Anne's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionEnvironmental healthScale (ratio)Food securityPopulationPsychologyGerontologyMental healthDemographyMedicineGeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of its intimate relationship with an insufficient dietary intake of nutrients essential for a healthy and active life, food insecurity (FI) is associated with a wide range of physical and mental health issues. Education is linked with better health through multiple pathways, including job prospects and income, risk for disease, intra‐generational effects, and behavioral and social factors. In most societies, especially in developing countries, women are more vulnerable than men to FI and to poor education levels. The present research uses the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) in the Gallup World Poll (GWP) to examine the impact of FI and education on self‐reported health status across nationally representative samples from 140 countries. This study aimed to ascertain the effects of FI, gender, and education on the likelihood that participants report health problems (HP). It also explored potential interactions in their effect on health. Data from the 2014 GWP were analyzed using IBM SPSS 21 with the Complex Samples module. One question regarding the presence of HP was selected as the outcome of interest. FI was assessed using the 8‐item FIES, considering food insecure (fi) individuals to be those who answered affirmatively to at least one questionnaire item. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the effect of the interaction term of FI, education and gender on HP. The model was adjusted for age, income, water quality, and household size. Data was weighted by country population size. The sample included 136,667 individuals, of which 50.1% were female, 24.9% reported having a HP, and 45.3% were fi. Regarding education, 45.4% completed elementary education or less, 46.1% completed up to three years of tertiary education, and 8.5% completed four years beyond ‘high school’ and/or received a college degree. The interaction term (FI, education, and gender) was statistically significant (p < 0.001). When compared to food secure men with the highest education level, fi women with low education level presented the highest odds of reporting HP (OR=5.2). Results reveal increased vulnerability to HP among women, fi individuals, and those with lower education levels, providing evidence that health is determined not only by internal factors as genetics or external ones such as healthy lifestyle, but also by social factors. These social determinants are important to take into account in health‐related policy decisions and program design.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations→French-language works237,207→