No abstract

The National Early Care and Education Learning Collaboratives (ECELC) project aims to facilitate best practices in nutrition, physical activity, screen time, and breastfeeding support and infant feeding among early care and education (ECE) programs across multiple states. The project uses a train-the-trainer approach with 5, in-person learning-collaborative sessions, technical assistance, and action planning. We describe the longitudinal practice-based evaluation of the project and assess whether ECE programs evaluated (n = 104) sustained changes in policies and practices 1 year after completing the project. The number of best practices increased from pre-assessment to post-assessment (P < .01) but did not change significantly from post-assessment to follow-up assessment. ECELC shows promise as an approach to incorporate professional development and training focused on improving best practices for environment-level child nutrition and physical activity, which is one strategy among many that are warranted for obesity prevention in young children.

Background In recent reviews of available measures, no existing measures assessed all four pillars of food security and most only assessed one or two pillars–predominantly the access pillar. The purpose of this study was to preliminarily develop novel measures of availability, utilization, and stability that are complementary to the USDA’s household food security survey measure (HFSSM). Methods A formative phase included an expert advisory group, literature scans, and interviews with individuals experiencing food insecurity. From April-June 2021, the new measures were piloted in five states (California, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, and Washington). The cross-sectional pilot survey included the new measures (perceived limited availability, utilization barriers, and food insecurity stability), scales and items for validation (e.g., food security, and self-reported dietary and health outcomes), and demographic questions. Exploratory factor analysis was used to assess dimensionality, internal consistency was assessed using Kuder-Richardson formula 21 (KR21), and convergent and discriminant validity were assessed using Spearman’s correlation coefficients. Also, a brief screener version was created for the utilization barriers measure that may be necessary for certain applications (e.g., clinical intake screening to inform referrals to assistance programs). Results The analytic samples (perceived limited availability (n = 334); utilization barriers (n = 428); food insecurity stability (n = 445)) were around 45 years old on average, most households had children, over two-thirds were food insecure, over three-fourths were women, and the samples were racially/ethnically diverse. All items loaded highly and unambiguously to a factor (factor loadings range 0.525–0.903). Food insecurity stability showed a four-factor structure, utilization barriers showed a two-factor structure, and perceived limited availability showed a two-factor structure. KR21 metrics ranged from 0.72 to 0.84. Higher scores for the new measures were generally associated with increased food insecurity (rhos = 0.248–0.497), except for one of the food insecurity stability scores. Also, several of the measures were associated with statistically significantly worse health and dietary outcomes. Conclusions The findings support the reliability and construct validity of these new measures within a largely low-income and food insecure sample of households in the United States. Following further testing, such as Confirmatory Factor Analysis in future samples, these measures may be used in various applications to promote a more comprehensive understanding of the food insecurity experience. Such work can help inform novel intervention approaches to address food insecurity more fully.

IntroductionThis study aimed to develop and test novel self-administered measures (Absorptive capacity, Adaptive capacity, and Transformative capacity) of three aspects of a household's resilience to financial shocks (e.g., job loss) that can increase food insecurity risk.MethodsMeasures were piloted in a convenience sample of households at risk for food insecurity in the United States. The survey included the new measures, validation variables (financial shock, household food security, general health, personal resilience to challenges, and financial wellbeing), and demographic questions. Exploratory factor analysis was used to assess dimensionality, internal consistency was assessed [Cronbach's alpha (CA)], and construct validity was assessed (Spearman's correlation). Also, brief screener versions of the full measures were created.ResultsParticipants in the analytic samples (n = 220-394) averaged 44 years old, 67% experienced food insecurity, 47% had a high school diploma or less, 72% were women, and the sample was racially/ethnically diverse. Scores for Absorptive capacity [one factor; CA = 0.70; Mean = 1.32 (SD = 0.54)], Adaptive capacity [three factors; CAs 0.83-0.90; Mean = 2.63 (SD = 0.85)], and Transformative capacity [three factors; CAs 0.87-0.95; Mean = 2.70 (SD = 1.10)] were negatively associated with financial shocks (−0.221 to −0.307) and positively associated with food insecurity (0.310-0.550) general health (0.255-0.320), personal resilience (0.231-0.384), and financial wellbeing (0.401-0.474).DiscussionThese findings are encouraging and support reliability and validity of these new measures within this sample. Following further testing, such as Confirmatory Factor Analysis in future samples, these measures may prove useful for needs assessments, program evaluation, intake screening, and research/surveillance. Widespread adoption in the future may promote a more comprehensive understanding of the food insecurity experience and facilitate development of tailored interventions on upstream causes of food insecurity.

Despite growing awareness of the financial burden that a cancer diagnosis places on a household, there is limited understanding of the risk for food insecurity among this population. The current study reviewed literature focusing on the relationship between food insecurity, cancer, and related factors among cancer survivors and their caregivers. In total, 49 articles (across 45 studies) were reviewed and spanned topic areas: patient navigation/social worker role, caregiver role, psychosocial impacts, and food insecurity/financial toxicity. Patient navigation yielded positive impacts including perceptions of better quality of care and improved health related quality of life. Caregivers served multiple roles: managing medications, emotional support, and medical advocacy. Subsequently, caregivers experience financial burden with loss of employment and work productivity. Negative psychosocial impacts experienced by cancer survivors included: cognitive impairment, financial constraints, and lack of coping skills. Financial strain experienced by cancer survivors was reported to influence ratings of physical/mental health and symptom burden. These results highlight that fields of food insecurity, obesity, and cancer control have typically grappled with these issues in isolation and have not robustly studied these factors in conjunction. There is an urgent need for well-designed studies with appropriate methods to establish key determinants of food insecurity among cancer survivors with multidisciplinary collaborators.