We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To determine the characteristics of US low-income households that use alternative food acquisition strategies and to examine the association between food security and alternative food acquisition.
Design:
Cross-sectional analysis. The ten-item Adult Food Security Survey Module was used to determine food security status. Self-reported data were used to determine food acquisition from community food sources, social networks and household food production.
Setting:
The National Food Acquisition and Purchasing Survey (FoodAPS), 2012.
Participants:
The sample consisted of 2534 low-income households (≤185 % of the federal poverty line) in the USA.
Results:
Households using alternative food acquisition strategies were more likely to have a primary respondent who was non-Hispanic White, born in the USA, and female, and more likely to live in a rural area, have higher income and own a home than households not using alternative acquisition strategies. Very low food security was positively associated with the use of community food sources (aOR = 2·26 (95 % CI 1·15, 4·46)). There was no association between food security and food acquisition from social networks or household food production.
Conclusions:
Use of alternative food acquisition strategies varied by specific demographic characteristics among low-income households, suggesting opportunities for outreach and promotion of alternative acquisition strategies in specific subpopulations in the USA. Future research should examine whether quantity and quality of food received from these sources are associated with food security.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.