Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38818953›Full record

ArticleJournal of primary care & community health

Screening for Food and Nutrition Insecurity in the Healthcare Setting: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Non-Medicaid Insured Adults in an Integrated Healthcare Delivery System.

Carmen Byker Shanks, Nancy P Gordon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Carmen Byker ShanksCenter for Nutrition and Health Impact, Omaha, NE, USA.
Nancy P GordonKaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research, Pleasanton, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3692-112X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHealthcare screening identifies factors that impact patient health and well-being. Hunger as a Vital Sign (HVS) is widely applied as a screening tool to assess food security. However, there are no common practice screening questions to identify patients who are nutrition insecure or acquire free food from community-based organizations. This study used self-reported survey data from a non-Medicaid insured adult population approximately one year after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (2021). The survey examined the extent to which the HVS measure might have under-estimated population-level food insecurity and/or nutrition insecurity, as well as under-identified food and nutrition insecurity among patients being screened for social risks in the healthcare setting.

methodsData from a 2021 English-only mailed/online survey were analyzed for 2791 Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) non-Medicaid insured members ages 35-85 years. Sociodemographics, financial strain, food insecurity, acquiring free food from community-based organizations, and nutrition insecurity were assessed. Data from respondents' electronic health records were abstracted to identify adults with diet-related chronic health conditions. Data were weighted to the age × sex × racial/ethnic composition of the 2019 KPNC adult membership. Differences between groups were evaluated for statistical significance using adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) derived from modified log Poisson regression models.

resultsOverall, 8.5% of participants reported moderate or high food insecurity, 7.7% had acquired free food from community-based organizations, and 13% had nutrition insecurity. Black and Latino adults were significantly more likely than White adults to have food insecurity (17.4% and 13.1% vs 5.6%, aPRs = 2.97 and 2.19), acquired free food from community-based organizations (15.1% and 15.3% vs 4.1%, aPRs = 3.74 and 3.93), nutrition insecurity (22.1% and 23.9% vs 7.9%, aPRs = 2.65 and 2.64), and food and nutrition insecurity (32.4% and 32.5% vs 12.3%, aPRs = 2.54 and 2.44). Almost 20% of adults who had been diagnosed with diabetes, prediabetes, ischemic CAD, or heart failure were food insecure and 14% were nutrition insecure.

conclusionsExpanding food-related healthcare screening to identify and assess food insecurity, nutrition insecurity, and use of community-based emergency food resources together is essential for supporting referrals that will help patients achieve optimal health.

Indexed as

COVID-19Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedFood InsecurityAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCaliforniaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle Agedfood insecuritynutrition insecurityracial/ethnic disparitiessocial determinants of healthsocial risk screening

Identifiers

PMID38818953
PMCPMC11143852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.