The Moderating Role of Perceived Community Belonging in the Association between Food Insecurity and Health and Well-Being
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While extensive research has established a link between food insecurity and adverse health and well-being outcomes, less attention has been given to factors that may moderate this relationship. This study examines whether a strong sense of community belonging can buffer the impact of food insecurity on mood and anxiety disorders, poor self-rated mental and general health, and low life satisfaction. Data were drawn from the 2017-2018 Canadian Community Health Survey, a nationally representative cross-sectional survey conducted by Statistics Canada (N = 94,790). Findings from logistic regression models indicate that individuals experiencing food insecurity are more likely to report adverse health and well-being outcomes. A strong sense of community belonging moderates this relationship, reducing the harmful impacts of food insecurity across all measured outcomes. Gender-stratified analyses reveal that this protective effect is particularly pronounced for mental health outcomes-including mood disorder, anxiety disorder, and self-rated mental health-among women. These findings underscore the importance of strengthening community connections as a protective factor, especially in supporting women's mental health in food-insecure settings. For social work practice, these results highlight the need to promote community engagement and implement gender-sensitive interventions to address the unique vulnerabilities associated with food insecurity.
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 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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it