Food Science and Human Nutrition Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Department of Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Nutrients. 2022 Aug 30;14(17):3569. doi: 10.3390/nu14173569.
Qualitative studies suggest that college students with food insecurity (FI) experience stigma and misinterpret some of the USDA Adult Food Security Survey Module (AFSSM) questions, leading to misclassification of food security (FS) status. We aimed to evaluate differences in AFSSM-measured FS status and self-categorized FS status (based on USDA descriptions of the four FS levels) among college students, and to identify differences in the coping strategies and BMI of these students. Data were collected cross-sectionally from a convenience sample via web-based, self-reported surveys. Measured FS, self-categorized FS, coping strategies, and self-reported BMI were key variables of interest. Participants were 1003 undergraduate and graduate students (22.2 ± 4.6 years; 65.7% female). Of the participants measured as food insecure (40.0%), 57.8% self-categorized as food secure (MFI-SFS) and 42.2% self-categorized as food insecure (MFI-SFI). Significantly more MFI-SFI participants were AFSSM-categorized as having very low FS when compared to MFI-SFS participants (71.6% vs. 46.6%, p < 0.05). MFI-SFI participants reported significantly higher BMI (M = 24.7, SD ± 6.0 kg/m2) and coping strategies scores (M = 49.8, SD ± 7.5) when compared to MFI-SFS participants (M = 23.1, SD ± 3.6 kg/m2; M = 46.9, SD ± 7.5, respectively, p ≤ 0.01). Assessment of and interventions to address FI among college students should consider the potential influence of self-perception and students’ interpretation of survey questions.
定性研究表明，患有食物不安全（FI）的大学生经历了污名化，并对美国农业部成人食物安全调查模块（AFSSM）的一些问题产生误解，从而导致食物安全（FS）状况的错误分类。我们旨在评估大学生中基于 USDA 对四个 FS 水平的描述的 AFSSM 测量的 FS 状况和自我分类的 FS 状况之间的差异，以及这些学生的应对策略和 BMI 之间的差异。数据是通过基于网络的自我报告调查从方便样本中横截面对大学生进行收集的。测量的 FS、自我分类的 FS、应对策略和自我报告的 BMI 是主要关注的变量。参与者是 1003 名本科和研究生（22.2 ± 4.6 岁；65.7%为女性）。在被测量为食物不安全的参与者中（40.0%），57.8%自我分类为食物安全（MFI-SFS），42.2%自我分类为食物不安全（MFI-SFI）。与 MFI-SFS 参与者相比，MFI-SFI 参与者中被 AFSSM 归类为 FS 极低的比例明显更高（71.6%比 46.6%，p < 0.05）。与 MFI-SFS 参与者相比，MFI-SFI 参与者报告的 BMI（M = 24.7，SD ± 6.0 kg/m2）和应对策略得分（M = 49.8，SD ± 7.5）明显更高（M = 23.1，SD ± 3.6 kg/m2；M = 46.9，SD ± 7.5，分别，p ≤ 0.01）。对大学生中的 FI 进行评估和干预时，应考虑到自我感知和学生对调查问题的解释的潜在影响。
