Comparing Household and Individual Measures of Access through a Food Environment Lens: What Household Food Opportunities Are Missed When Measuring Access to Food Retail at the Individual Level?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geographers and public health researchers have long been interested in social, spatial, and economic factors that drive access and exposure to food retail. A growing body of evidence draws on mobility data to capture locations accessed by individuals beyond the home address. Given that food-related activities are shared by household members and often gendered, taking an individual-level approach might limit researchers’ ability to accurately describe access to food retail. Using data that includes Global Positioning System trajectories of forty-six adults from twenty-one households in Toronto, this study compares access to food retailers at the individual and household levels and evaluates measurement issues that arise when relying on one household member. Spatial and spatiotemporal measures of access were derived from individual and total household activity spaces. Differences in access were tested for men and women and moderating effects of neighborhood, shopping responsibility, car access, and employment status were investigated. Supermarket density was greater for women when compared with men in the household, as well as their total household measure. Additionally, within-household differences in counts of supermarkets were moderated by neighborhood. Future research should consider the role of place and the contributions of household members when measuring access to food at the individual level.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".