Faber Mieke, Wenhold Friede A M, Laurie Sunette M
a Non-communicable Diseases Research Unit , South African Medical Research Council , Tygerberg , South Africa.
b Department Human Nutrition, Faculty of Health Sciences , University of Pretoria , Arcadia , South Africa.
Ecol Food Nutr. 2017 Jan-Feb;56(1):62-80. doi: 10.1080/03670244.2016.1261024. Epub 2016 Dec 15.
Sociodemographic, living standard measure, consumption of vegetables and fruit, and dietary diversity in relation to household food security were assessed. Using a hunger score, households were categorized as food secure (n = 125) or food insecure (n = 273). Food secure respondents had a higher mean dietary diversity score (3.98; 95%CI [3.79, 4.18] versus 3.65; 95% [CI 3.53, 3.77]), were more likely to eat vitamin A-rich foods (OR 1.15; 95% CI [1.05, 1.26]), a more varied diet (DDS ≥ 4, OR 1.90; 95% CI [1.19, 3.13]), and vegetables daily (OR 3.37; 95% CI [2.00, 5.76]). Cost limited daily vegetable/fruit consumption in food insecure households. Respondents with ≥ 8 years of schooling were more likely (OR 2.07; 95% CI [1.22, 3.53]) and households receiving social grants were less likely (OR 0.37; 95% CI [0.19, 0.72]) to be food secure. Results highlight the association between dietary diversity and household food security.
评估了社会人口统计学、生活水平衡量指标、蔬菜和水果的消费量以及与家庭粮食安全相关的饮食多样性。使用饥饿评分，将家庭分为粮食安全家庭（n = 125）和粮食不安全家庭（n = 273）。粮食安全的受访者平均饮食多样性得分更高（3.98；95%置信区间[3.79, 4.18]，而粮食不安全家庭为3.65；95%[置信区间3.53, 3.77]），更有可能食用富含维生素A的食物（比值比1.15；95%置信区间[1.05, 1.26]），饮食更多样化（饮食多样性得分≥4，比值比1.90；95%置信区间[1.19, 3.13]），并且每天食用蔬菜（比值比3.37；95%置信区间[2.00, 5.76]）。成本限制了粮食不安全家庭每天的蔬菜/水果消费量。接受≥8年教育的受访者粮食安全的可能性更大（比值比2.07；95%置信区间[1.22, 3.53]），而领取社会补助金的家庭粮食安全的可能性较小（比值比0.37；95%置信区间[0.19, 0.72]）。结果突出了饮食多样性与家庭粮食安全之间的关联。
