Wolfe W S, Olson C M, Kendall A, Frongillo E A
Cornell University, USA.
J Aging Health. 1998 Aug;10(3):327-50. doi: 10.1177/089826439801000304.
To better understand the nature of food insecurity in the elderly and to improve its measurement, in-depth interviews were conducted with 41 urban Black and rural White elderly in 35 households, followed by telephone administration of commonly used measures of food insecurity in 24 of these elderly. Elderly food insecurity appears to follow a progression of severity, beginning with compromised diet quality, followed by food anxiety, socially unacceptable meals, use of emergency food strategies, and finally actual hunger. The five quantitative measures tested were compared to each elderly person's food insecurity status based on the in-depth interview. All measures had reasonable specificity, and good sensitivity for those experiencing severe food insecurity. However, the Cornell-Radimer, Community Childhood Hunger Identification Project (CCHIP) and Nutrition Screening Initiative (NSI) measures appeared more sensitive than the USDA food sufficiency or Urban Institute measures in correctly identifying those in the lesser stages of food insecurity.
为了更好地理解老年人粮食不安全的本质并改进其衡量方法，我们对35户家庭中的41名城市黑人老年人和农村白人老年人进行了深入访谈，随后对其中24名老年人进行了常用粮食不安全衡量方法的电话调查。老年人的粮食不安全似乎呈现出严重程度的递进，从饮食质量受损开始，接着是食物焦虑、社会上不可接受的饮食、采用应急食物策略，最后是实际饥饿。将所测试的五项定量衡量方法与基于深入访谈得出的每位老年人的粮食不安全状况进行了比较。所有衡量方法都具有合理的特异性，对经历严重粮食不安全的人具有良好的敏感性。然而，在正确识别处于粮食不安全较轻阶段的人方面，康奈尔 - 拉迪默、社区儿童饥饿识别项目（CCHIP）和营养筛查倡议（NSI）的衡量方法似乎比美国农业部的粮食充足衡量方法或城市研究所的衡量方法更敏感。
