Households with children accessing food aid in high-income countries are often food insecure. We aimed to review the evidence on food aid interventions in households with children and impact on food insecurity, diet quality and mental health.

A systematic search was conducted using Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Articles published from January 2008 to July 2022 including cross-sectional, cohort and interventional studies in high-income countries were eligible.

Food aid is defined as the use of interventions providing free food items by community and/or charitable organisations.

Two-parent, lone parent or households with a primary caregiver with at least one child ≤ 18 years.

From a total of 10 394 articles, nine were included. Food banks, mobile pantry combined with a free meal for children, backpack provision during school term and food parcel home delivery interventions were evaluated. Food bank models offering additional support such as community programmes, health and social services, cooking classes and free meals for children, client-choice-based models and programmes providing convenient access were associated with improved food security and diet quality (increased intake of wholegrains, fruit and vegetables). One study reported an improvement in mental health and food bank access at the end of 18 months but not at earlier timepoints and one study reported no change in parents’ mental health.

Accessing food aid was linked to improved diet quality and reduced food insecurity in some studies. Allowing clients to choose food items and providing support services were most effective.

To investigate food insecurity and related coping strategies, and their associations with the risk of anxiety and depression, among South African households with children.

Nationally representative cross-sectional study. Tools for assessing food insecurity, coping strategies, risk of anxiety and depression were assessed from the Community Childhood Hunger Identification Project, Coping Strategies Index, Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9, respectively. We used ordered logistic regression to test associations of food insecurity and coping strategies with the risk of anxiety and depression. Moderating effects of each coping strategy were tested in the associations of food insecurity with anxiety and depression.

South Africa, post COVID-19 restrictions, May–June 2022.

1,774 adults, weighted to 20,955,234 households.

Food insecurity prevalence was 23·7 % among households with children. All coping strategies were used to some extent, but relying on less preferred and less expensive foods was the most used strategy (85·5 % of food-insecure households). Moving to a higher level of food insecurity was associated with >1·6 greater odds of being in a higher risk of anxiety and depression. Sending a household member to beg for food was the strongest associated factor (OR = 1·7, P < 0·001). All coping strategies partly moderated (lessened) the associations of food insecurity with a higher risk of anxiety and depression.

Food insecurity among households with children was high following the COVID-19 pandemic. Collaborative efforts between government, private sector and civil society to eradicate food insecurity should prioritise poorer households with children, as these populations are the most vulnerable.

Changes in the item order of the US Household Food Security Survey Module (USHFSSM) were performed throughout time. This study aimed to compare the psychometric properties of the general and specific factors of the 2000 and 2012 versions of the USHFSSM to measure the construct of food insecurity in two Portuguese samples of households with children.

Cross-sectional.

Portugal.

An adaptation of the 2000 version was applied to 839 adults (from households with children aged 7–17 years) from the National Food, Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey 2015–2016, while the 2012 version was used among 2855 families from the Generation XXI birth cohort.

The 2000 version showed to have a stronger ωh than the 2012 version (0·89 v. 0·78 for the general factor), as well as eigenvalues higher than 1 for the general factor (eigenvalues equal to 9·54, 0·97 and 0·80, for the general factor, specific factor 1 and specific factor 2, respectively), while the 2012 version had also the contribution of specific factors to explain food insecurity (eigenvalues equal to 9·40, 2·40 and 1·20, for general factor and specific factors 1 and 2, respectively). Good internal consistency (ωt = 0·99, for both versions) was obtained.

In conclusion, the 2000 and 2012 versions of the USHFSSM showed good psychometric properties; however, the 2000 version has stronger general factor, while the 2012 version also has the contribution of specific factors.