首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>PLoS Clinical Trials >Are estimates of food insecurity among college students accurate? Comparison of assessment protocols
【2h】

Are estimates of food insecurity among college students accurate? Comparison of assessment protocols

机译:对大学生食品不安全的估计是否准确?评估方案比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

A growing body of literature suggests that post-secondary students experience food insecurity (FI) at greater rates than the general population. However, these rates vary dramatically across institutions and studies. FI assessment methods commonly used in studies with college students have not been scrutinized for psychometric properties, and varying protocols may influence resulting FI prevalence estimates. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of standard food security assessment protocols and to evaluate their agreement as well as the relative accuracy of these protocols in identifying student FI. A randomized sample of 4,000 undergraduate students were invited to participate in an online survey (Qualtrics, LLC, Provo, Utah, USA) that evaluated sociodemographic characteristics and FI with the 2-item food sufficiency screener and the 10-item USDA Adult Food Security Survey Module (FSSM; containing the abbreviated 6-item module). Four hundred sixty-two eligible responses were included in the final sample. The psychometric analysis revealed inconsistencies in college student response patterns on the FSSM when compared to national evaluations. Agreement between FI protocols was generally high (>90%) but was lessened when compared with a protocol that incorporated the 2-item screener. The 10-item FSSM with the 2-item screener had the best model fit (McFadden’s R2 = 0.15 and Bayesian Information Criterion = -2049.72) and emerged as the tool providing the greatest relative accuracy for identifying students with FI. Though the 10-item FSSM and 2-item screener yields the most accuracy in this sample, it is unknown why students respond to FSSM items differently than the general population. Further qualitative and quantitative evaluations are needed to determine which assessment protocol is the most valid and reliable for use in accurately identifying FI in post-secondary students across the U.S.
机译:越来越多的文献表明,大专生比普通人群遭受粮食不安全感的比率更高。但是,这些比率在不同的机构和研究中差别很大。尚未对大学生研究中常用的FI评估方法的心理测量特性进行检查,并且不同的协议可能会影响最终的FI患病率估计。这项研究的目的是评估标准食品安全评估协议的性能,评估其协议以及这些协议在识别学生FI中的相对准确性。邀请了4,000名大学生的随机样本参加在线调查(Qualtrics,LLC,Provo,美国犹他州),该调查使用2种食物充足性筛查仪和10种USDA成人食物安全调查评估了社会人口统计学特征和FI模块(FSSM;包含缩写的6项模块)。最终样本中包括462个符合条件的回复。心理分析显示,与国家评估相比,FSSM大学生反应模式不一致。 FI协议之间的协议通常很高(> 90%),但是与包含2项筛选器的协议相比,协议的协议被减少了。带有2个项目筛选器的10个项目FSSM具有最佳模型拟合度(McFadden的R 2 = 0.15和贝叶斯信息准则= -2049.72),并成为提供最高相对准确性以识别学生的工具与FI。尽管在此样本中10项FSSM和2项筛选器的准确性最高,但不知道为什么学生对FSSM的回答与普通人群的回答有所不同。需要进一步的定性和定量评估,以确定哪种评估协议最有效,最可靠,可用于准确识别全美大专生的金融中介。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号