ReviewNutrition research and practice2026
Exploring the relationship between food literacy and food insecurity: a systematic review.
Review in Nutrition research and practice, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesInterest in food insecurity (FI) has intensified amid global efforts to address dietary and nutritional issues. Food literacy (FL) has emerged as a key competency for promoting healthy eating behaviors and potentially mitigating FI. This systematic review synthesized evidence on the relationship between FL and FI by summarizing their definitions and components, comparing measurement tools, and examining overall trends and characteristics of their association. MATERIALS/
methodsThis review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework. Studies examining FL and FI as primary variables were identified from PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Nine studies published between 2019 and 2025 were included. Methodological quality was assessed using JBI checklists, and findings were synthesized narratively due to study heterogeneity.
resultsThe included studies employed cross-sectional, quasi-experimental (pre-post), mixed-methods, and cluster randomized controlled designs. FI was primarily assessed using definitions proposed by the Food and Agriculture Organization or the United States Department of Agriculture. FL was commonly measured using frameworks based on Vidgen and Gallegos (2014). Most cross-sectional studies reported an inverse relationship between FI and FL. However, one cross-sectional study found no significant relationship, suggesting that sociocultural and economic factors may influence this association. Intervention studies generally showed improvements in FL and reductions in FI or related behaviors.
conclusionMost studies indicated that individual FL levels were associated with FI status. In some studies, this relationship appeared to be influenced by sociodemographic, economic, and cultural factors, although these findings were not consistently reported. The findings suggested that combining FL education with structural strategies may more effectively alleviate FI. Future research should use standardized measurement tools and longitudinal or randomized controlled designs to clarify the observed associations and potential mechanisms underlying the relationship between FL and FI.
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.