Author: Kent, Katherine; Murray, Sandra; Penrose, Beth; Auckland, Stuart; Visentin, Denis; Godrich, Stephanie; Lester, Elizabeth
Title: Prevalence and Socio-Demographic Predictors of Food Insecurity in Australia during the COVID-19 Pandemic Cord-id: wllc0gl5 Document date: 2020_9_2
ID: wllc0gl5
Snippet: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated economic vulnerabilities and disrupted the Australian food supply, with potential implications for food insecurity. This study aims to describe the prevalence and socio-demographic associations of food insecurity in Tasmania, Australia, during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional survey (deployed late May to early June 2020) incorporated the U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form, and fifteen demographic and COVID-related income
Document: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated economic vulnerabilities and disrupted the Australian food supply, with potential implications for food insecurity. This study aims to describe the prevalence and socio-demographic associations of food insecurity in Tasmania, Australia, during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional survey (deployed late May to early June 2020) incorporated the U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form, and fifteen demographic and COVID-related income questions. Survey data (n = 1170) were analyzed using univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression. The prevalence of food insecurity was 26%. The adjusted odds of food insecurity were higher among respondents with a disability, from a rural area, and living with dependents. Increasing age, a university education, and income above $80,000/year were protective against food insecurity. Food insecurity more than doubled with a loss of household income above 25% (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 2.02; 95% CI: 1.11, 3.71; p = 0.022), and the odds further increased with loss of income above 75% (AOR: 7.14; 95% CI: 2.01, 24.83; p = 0.002). Our results suggest that the prevalence of food insecurity may have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among economically vulnerable households and people who lost income. Policies that support disadvantaged households and ensure adequate employment opportunities are important to support Australians throughout and post the COVID-19 pandemic.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- local government and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
- local government and low literacy: 1
- local government and low prevalence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
- local government and low proportion: 1
- local government area and logistic regression: 1
- local government areas and logistic regression: 1
- local government areas and low income: 1
- logistic regression and long term temporary: 1
- logistic regression and loss low income: 1, 2
- logistic regression and low education level: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
- logistic regression and low food security: 1, 2, 3, 4
- logistic regression and low income: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72
- logistic regression and low income household: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
- logistic regression and low literacy: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
- logistic regression and low low food security: 1, 2
- logistic regression and low low marginal: 1
- logistic regression and low marginal: 1, 2
- logistic regression and low prevalence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47
- logistic regression and low proportion: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date