Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36079826›Full record

ArticleNutrients2022

Differences in Measured and Self-Categorized Food Security Status and Related Coping Strategies among College Students.

Megan D Engel, Karla P Shelnutt, Lisa A House, Aseel El Zein, Anne E Mathews

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06802406 (Nutrition OUtReach In Systems of Healthcare), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06802406 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Nutrition OUtReach In Systems of Healthcare

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Kansas Medical CenterRan2025 to 2029Enrolled210ConditionsALLOGENEIC HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION, Autologous Haemopoietic Stem Cell Transplant, CAR-T Cell Therapy, Food InsecurityArmsFood Bags
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Megan D EngelFood Science and Human Nutrition Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Karla P ShelnuttDepartment of Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3799-9212
Lisa A HouseDepartment of Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1901-6550
Aseel El ZeinDepartment of Nutrition Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA.
Anne E MathewsFood Science and Human Nutrition Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3504-5826
University of Florida · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Qualitative studies suggest that college students with food insecurity (FI) experience stigma and misinterpret some of the USDA Adult Food Security Survey Module (AFSSM) questions, leading to misclassification of food security (FS) status. We aimed to evaluate differences in AFSSM-measured FS status and self-categorized FS status (based on USDA descriptions of the four FS levels) among college students, and to identify differences in the coping strategies and BMI of these students. Data were collected cross-sectionally from a convenience sample via web-based, self-reported surveys. Measured FS, self-categorized FS, coping strategies, and self-reported BMI were key variables of interest. Participants were 1003 undergraduate and graduate students (22.2 ± 4.6 years; 65.7% female). Of the participants measured as food insecure (40.0%), 57.8% self-categorized as food secure (MFI-SFS) and 42.2% self-categorized as food insecure (MFI-SFI). Significantly more MFI-SFI participants were AFSSM-categorized as having very low FS when compared to MFI-SFS participants (71.6% vs. 46.6%, p < 0.05). MFI-SFI participants reported significantly higher BMI (M = 24.7, SD ± 6.0 kg/m2) and coping strategies scores (M = 49.8, SD ± 7.5) when compared to MFI-SFS participants (M = 23.1, SD ± 3.6 kg/m2; M = 46.9, SD ± 7.5, respectively, p ≤ 0.01). Assessment of and interventions to address FI among college students should consider the potential influence of self-perception and students’ interpretation of survey questions.

Indexed as

Food SupplyStudentsAdaptation, PsychologicalAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFood SecurityHumansMaleSocioeconomic FactorsUniversitiescollege studentscoping strategiesfood insecuritynutrition insecurityobesityUSDA AFSSMyoung adults

Identifiers

PMID36079826
PMCPMC9460733
OpenAlexW4293716287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.