Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37174353›Full record

ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Measuring Food Insecurity: The Problem with Semantics.

Rachel M Sumsion, Haylie M June, Michael R Cope

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Rewriting the Narrative: Advancing Justice and Equity in the U.S. Food System.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

3 authors.

Rachel M SumsionDepartment of Sociology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA.
Haylie M JuneDepartment of Sociology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA.
Michael R CopeDepartment of Sociology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7753-2812

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

food insecurityfood securityhungerlevels of analysismeasurement

Identifiers

PMID37174353
PMCPMC10178861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.