2006
DOI: 10.1300/j477v01n01_06
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effects of the Local Food Environment and Social Support on Rural Food Insecurity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
72
3

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 84 publications
(79 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
4
72
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Although other studies have suggested that social support may be important because individuals draw on such resources when threatened with food insecurity (10,19,36) , we found no evidence of an association between social support and food insecurity and no evidence that social support acts as a moderator between income and food insecurity. These findings may be attributable to several factors.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Although other studies have suggested that social support may be important because individuals draw on such resources when threatened with food insecurity (10,19,36) , we found no evidence of an association between social support and food insecurity and no evidence that social support acts as a moderator between income and food insecurity. These findings may be attributable to several factors.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…About 12% of all US households and 36.8% of low-income households in 2004 were food insecure (Gorman et al, 2006), suggesting that as a state program it is not entirely successful. Garasky et al (2006) find that food assistance program participation in rural areas including food pantries, food stamps, and WIC do not reduce food insecurity. They conclude that the ''formal support structure of food assistance programs for families is not adequate'' (Garasky et al, 2006: 99).…”
Section: Redistribution and Reciprocitymentioning
confidence: 83%
“…In terms of characteristics of the target populations studied, seven of the eighteen studies examined adults of varying ages (37)(38)(39)(43)(44)(45)(46) , seven explicitly examined families with children (sometimes with data collected using the child as the sampling unit) (40,42,(47)(48)(49)(50)(51) , three focused on seniors (41,52,53) , and one sampled a range of ages (children and adults) (54) . Seven out of the eighteen studies (39 %) focused exclusively on low-income or ethnic subgroups (39,44,46,(48)(49)(50)(51) .…”
Section: Literature Search and General Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Four studies used the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) eighteen-item Food Security Scale (40,44,48,51) , although Kirkpatrick and Tarasuk (2010) (48) applied Health Canada's thresholds to define moderate and severe food insecurity. Five studies used the six-item short form of the USDA Food Security Scale (37)(38)(39)42,47) , three studies used items from the Community Childhood Hunger Identification Project in the National Health and Nutrition Examination (NHANES) III surveys (46,50,53) , and one study was based on items administered in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (41) . The three Australian studies (45,52,54) and Dean and Sharkey (2011) (43) adapted and used items from the Radimer/Cornell measure, while Sharkey et al (2011) used an adapted version of the complete Radimer/Cornell measure (49) .…”
Section: Literature Search and General Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%