ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Measuring Food Insecurity: The Problem with Semantics.
Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Food Insecurity in Peru: Measurement Properties of the FIES and Prevalence Estimates from the 2025 Household Survey.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Clarifying the Association Between Food Insecurity and Chronic Disease: Why Methods Matter.Current nutrition reports · 2026Review
- Validation and reliability of the Turkish version of the food insecurity experience scale (FIES) among adults.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Rewriting the Narrative: Advancing Justice and Equity in the U.S. Food System.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Dying of starvation if not from bombs: assessing measurement properties of the Food Insecurity Experiences Scale (FIES) in Gaza's civilian population experiencing the world's worst hunger crisis.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rising rates of hunger and food insecurity have sparked a major re-evaluation of all aspects of food systems. Because of the multifaceted nature of food insecurity, however, determining what actions should be taken is challenging, especially since reevaluation efforts are led by experts from several disciplines and there is no consensus about which indicators should be used and how they should be measured. Confusion surrounding the meaning of the terms 'food security' and 'food insecurity' has contributed to this lack of consensus. As indicators inform action, such confusion has slowed those committed to alleviating hunger in identifying the most pressing targets. This review highlights (1) the importance of clearly defining food security and food insecurity and (2) how such definitions affect measures of food insecurity in the United States. While some might say that definitions are an issue of the past or a trivial matter of semantics, we believe that the world's present rates of hunger and malnutrition are attributable, at least in part, to the lack of consensus on these definitions and their accompanying measurements and indicators. Although the present review can be helpful to academics and policy makers, the primary purpose is to be a resource to those involved in the day-to-day production of food, such as ranchers and farmers by providing an overview of definitions, indicators, and measurements used when discussing food security.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.