Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have high burdens of nutrition-related chronic diseases. This has been associated with lack of access to adequate and affordable nutritious foods and increasing reliance on imported foods. Our aim in this study was to investigate dietary patterns and food insecurity and assess their associations with socio-demographic characteristics and food sources. We recruited individuals aged 15 years and above from rural and urban areas in Fiji (n = 186) and St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) (n = 147). Data collection included a 24 h diet recall, food source questionnaire and the Food Insecurity Experience Scale. We conducted latent class analysis to identify dietary patterns, and multivariable regression to investigate independent associations with dietary patterns. Three dietary patterns were identified: (1) low pulses, and milk and milk products, (2) intermediate pulses, and milk and milk products and (3) most diverse. In both SIDS, dietary pattern 3 was associated with older age, regularly sourcing food from supermarkets and borrowing, exchanging, bartering or gifting (BEB). Prevalence of food insecurity was not statistically different across dietary patterns. In both SIDS, food insecurity was higher in those regularly sourcing food from small shops, and in SVG, lower in those regularly using BEB. These results complement previous findings and provide a basis for further investigation into the determinants of dietary patterns, dietary diversity and food insecurity in these settings.
IntroductionFood security in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) is an international policy priority. SIDS have high rates of nutrition-related non-communicable diseases, including obesity and type 2 diabetes, micronutrient deficiencies and, in many, persistent childhood stunting. This is associated with an increasing reliance on imported processed food of poor nutritional quality. Calls have been made for strengthening local food systems, resilient to climate change, to increase the consumption of nutritious locally produced food. We aimed to systematically review interventions intended to improve diet in SIDS, and specifically explore whether these interventions applied a local food approach.MethodsThe search strategy was applied to 11 databases, including in health, social science and agriculture. Screening of titles, abstracts and data extraction was undertaken in duplicate. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane tools. Narrative synthesis of the results was undertaken. The study protocol was registered (PROSPERO registration number: 2020CRD42020201274).ResultsFrom 26 062 records, 154 full texts were reviewed and 24 were eligible. Included studies were from the Caribbean, Pacific, Mauritius and Singapore. Five were a randomised study design, one an interrupted time series analysis, eight controlled and ten uncontrolled pre-test and post-test. Nine studies included some aspect of a local food approach. Most interventions (n=15) included nutrition education, with evidence of effectiveness largely limited to those that also included practical skills training, such as vegetable gardening or food preparation. Three studies were considered low risk of bias, with the majority (n=13) of moderate risk.ConclusionThere is a lack of robust evidence on interventions to improve diet in SIDS. The evidence suggests that multifaceted approaches are likely to be the most effective, and local food approaches may promote effectiveness, through mechanisms of cultural and contextual relevance. Further development and evaluation of interventions is urgently required to increase the comparability of these studies, to help guide policy on improving nutrition in SIDS.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.