ArticleScientific reports2026
Socioeconomic, demographic and geographic disparities in accessibility to food pantries in the united States.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Improving access to food pantries (FPs) may help address food insecurity, yet national-level assessments of geographic and socioeconomic disparities remain limited. We created a dataset of 34,475 FPs across all 50 states and the District of Columbia and analyzed their accessibility to the nearest Census block group (BG). We defined accessibility as high, medium, or low based on travel time or distance. Analyses of 239,780 BGs showed that 23.4% had low FP access. We identified geographic disparities across regions and states. For example, states in the Northeast generally have higher FP accessibility, while those in the South show lower access. Although rural BGs are more socioeconomically disadvantaged than urban ones (mean ADI: 71.3 vs. 45.8), they generally have better FP access (only 8.5% with low access vs. 26.5% in urban areas). However, some rural BGs with low FP accessibility tend to have high ADI values. In urban areas, FP placement shows relatively good alignment withneighborhood needs based on analyses of socioeconomic characteristics. In contrast, rural access patterns are more mixed. For example, less-educated rural populations face greater barriers. Findings from this study can inform policy and implementation strategies to improve FP access in underserved communities.
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.