How gender, education and nutrition knowledge contribute to food insecurity among adults in Australia.

Food and nutrition insecurity occurs when healthy and safe food cannot be obtained by socially acceptable means and arises as a result of complex interactions between socioeconomic and demographic determinants. These factors contribute to discrepancies in health and well-being between men and women and may also explain differential rates of food insecurity. The objectives of this cross-sectional study were to investigate the intersection between gender, education, nutrition knowledge and food security status within a high-income country context. Australian adults over 16 years of age who identified as having primary responsibility for food in their household were recruited via social media and a panel. Respondents completed a self-administered survey that included sociodemographic data, nutrition-related knowledge and food security status. Food security was measured using the Australian Household Food and Nutrition Security Scale an adapted version of the United States Department of Agriculture Household Food Security Survey. Among the 1010 survey respondents, household food insecurity (HFI) was highly prevalent (43% were food insecure, with 26% of these severely food insecure). Gender may affect associations between education, nutrition knowledge and HFI. Education was significantly associated with HFI among women but not among men. Conversely, nutrition knowledge was significantly inversely associated with food security among men but not among women. Differences in determinants of HFI exist between men and women, and programs aimed at addressing food insecurity may be more effective if tailored accordingly to account for the social and demographic factors associated with HFI.

Single-item measure of food insecurity used in the National Health Survey may underestimate prevalence in Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To compare prevalence estimates of food insecurity using a single-item measure, with three adaptations of the United States Department of Agriculture Food Security Survey Module (USDA-FSSM). METHODS: Data were collected by postal survey, from individuals aged ≥18 years from disadvantaged suburbs of Brisbane, Australia (n= 505, 53% response). Food security status was ascertained by the Australian single-item measure, and the 6-, 10- and 18-item versions of the USDA-FSSM. Prevalence estimates of food insecurity and different levels of severity of food insecurity estimated by each tool were determined. Data were analysed using McNemar's test, polychoric correlation and Rasch analyses. RESULTS: The prevalence of food insecurity was 19.5% using the single-item measure; significantly less than the 24.4%, 22.8% and 21.1% identified using the 18-item, 10-item and 6-item versions of the USDA-FSSM, respectively. Rasch analyses revealed that overall the USDA-FSSM may be a valid tool for the measurement of food insecurity within the current sample. CONCLUSION: The measure of food insecurity employed in national surveys in Australia may underestimate its prevalence and public health significance. Implications for public health: Future monitoring and surveillance efforts should seek to employ a more accurate measure as the first step in recognising the right to food for all Australians.

Preliminary validation and piloting of a comprehensive measure of household food security in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the psychometric properties, validity and reliability of a newly developed measure of food insecurity, the Household Food and Nutrition Security Survey (HFNSS), among an Australian population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Metropolitan areas of Melbourne, Australia, identified as very high, high or medium vulnerability in the 2008 Vulnerability Assessment for Mortgage, Petrol and Inflation Risks and Expenditure index. SUBJECTS: A convenience sample of 134 adults (117 females and fifteen males, aged over 18 years). RESULTS: Rasch modelling and factor analysis identified four items for exclusion. The remaining items yielded excellent reliability among the current sample and assessed three underlying components: the adult experience of food insecurity (component one), initial/periodic changes to children's food intakes (component two) and progressive/persistent decreases in children's food intakes (component three). Compared with the widely used US Department of Agriculture Food Security Survey Module, the HFNSS identified a significantly higher proportion of food insecurity; this is likely due to the HFNSS's identification of food insecurity due to reasons other than (and including) limited financial access. CONCLUSIONS: The HFNSS may be a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of food insecurity among the Australian population and provides a means of assessing multiple barriers to food security beyond poor financial access (which has been identified as a limitation of other existing tools). Future research should explore the validity and reliability of the tool among a more representative sample, as well as specifically among vulnerable population subgroups.