Comparisons of Cooking, Dietary, and Food Safety Characteristics of Food Secure and Food Insecure Sophomores at a University in Appalachia.

Journal of Appalachian health Pub Date : 2021-10-25 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.13023/jah.0304.08
Hannah E Boone, Melissa D Gutschall, Alisha R Farris, Kimberly S Fasczewski, Donald Holbert, Laura H McArthur
{"title":"Comparisons of Cooking, Dietary, and Food Safety Characteristics of Food Secure and Food Insecure Sophomores at a University in Appalachia.","authors":"Hannah E Boone, Melissa D Gutschall, Alisha R Farris, Kimberly S Fasczewski, Donald Holbert, Laura H McArthur","doi":"10.13023/jah.0304.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Food insecurity means lacking access to adequate, nutritious, and safe food. Collegiate food insecurity rates at ten Appalachian campuses range from 22.4% to 51.8% and have been associated with unfavorable health and academic outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study compared cooking, dietary, and food safety characteristics of food secure (FS) and food insecure (FI) sophomores at a university in Appalachia in the context of the USDA definition of food security.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were collected using an online questionnaire. Descriptive and inferential procedures compared FS and FI sophomores (p < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants (n = 226) were 65.0% females, 76.1% whites, and 46% FI. About 40% of on-campus and 50% of off-campus residents were FI, and 70% of FI students reported needing help accessing food. Cooking was undertaken \"less often\" by 61.5% of FS and 55.8% of FI sophomores. Mean cooking self-efficacy scores for FS and FI students were 44.9, vs 43.4, (p > 0.05) out of 52 points. Grains were consumed most often by 40% of FS and FI students and vegetables were consumed least often by 70% of both groups. Mean food safety test scores for FS and FI students were 6.2 1.60 vs 6.6 1.52 (p > 0.05) out of 11 points. Requested educational activities included making a budget and planning balanced meals.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>The high rate of food insecurity reflects an ongoing need among sophomores for campus and community food assistance and for educational activities that teach purchasing and preparation of affordable, healthy and safe foods.</p>","PeriodicalId":73599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Appalachian health","volume":"3 4","pages":"89-108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9183792/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Appalachian health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13023/jah.0304.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Food insecurity means lacking access to adequate, nutritious, and safe food. Collegiate food insecurity rates at ten Appalachian campuses range from 22.4% to 51.8% and have been associated with unfavorable health and academic outcomes.

Purpose: This study compared cooking, dietary, and food safety characteristics of food secure (FS) and food insecure (FI) sophomores at a university in Appalachia in the context of the USDA definition of food security.

Methods: Data were collected using an online questionnaire. Descriptive and inferential procedures compared FS and FI sophomores (p < 0.05).

Results: Participants (n = 226) were 65.0% females, 76.1% whites, and 46% FI. About 40% of on-campus and 50% of off-campus residents were FI, and 70% of FI students reported needing help accessing food. Cooking was undertaken "less often" by 61.5% of FS and 55.8% of FI sophomores. Mean cooking self-efficacy scores for FS and FI students were 44.9, vs 43.4, (p > 0.05) out of 52 points. Grains were consumed most often by 40% of FS and FI students and vegetables were consumed least often by 70% of both groups. Mean food safety test scores for FS and FI students were 6.2 1.60 vs 6.6 1.52 (p > 0.05) out of 11 points. Requested educational activities included making a budget and planning balanced meals.

Implications: The high rate of food insecurity reflects an ongoing need among sophomores for campus and community food assistance and for educational activities that teach purchasing and preparation of affordable, healthy and safe foods.

比较阿巴拉契亚地区一所大学中食物安全和食物不安全的大二学生的烹饪、饮食和食品安全特征。
导言:食物不安全意味着无法获得充足、营养和安全的食物。目的:本研究根据美国农业部对食品安全的定义,比较了阿巴拉契亚地区一所大学的食品安全(FS)和食品不安全(FI)大二学生的烹饪、饮食和食品安全特征:方法:使用在线问卷收集数据。结果:参与者(n = 226 人)对美国农业部关于食品安全的定义进行了分析,并对食品安全和食品不安全的大二学生进行了描述性和推论性比较(P < 0.05):参与者(n = 226)中女性占 65.0%,白人占 76.1%,FI 占 46%。约 40% 的校内居民和 50% 的校外居民为家庭主妇,70% 的家庭主妇学生表示在获取食物方面需要帮助。61.5%的 FS 和 55.8% 的 FI 高二学生 "不太经常 "做饭。FS和FI学生的平均烹饪自我效能感得分分别为44.9分和43.4分(满分52分,P>0.05)。40%的FS和FI学生最常食用谷物,70%的FS和FI学生最不常食用蔬菜。在满分 11 分的测试中,FS 和 FI 学生的食品安全测试平均分分别为 6.2 1.60 和 6.6 1.52(P > 0.05)。要求开展的教育活动包括制定预算和平衡膳食计划:食物不安全的高发率反映了高二学生对校园和社区食物援助以及教育活动的持续需求,教育活动包括购买和准备经济实惠、健康安全的食物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信