Impact of the supplemental nutritional assistance program on diet‐related disease morbidity among older adults

Booshehri, Layla G.; Dugan, Jerome

doi:10.1111/1475-6773.13609

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although young adults in Taiwan are not eligible for any other state‐sanctioned activities at age 20 other than voting, there could be unobserved determinants of health care use that increase health care expenditures when individuals turn 20. We formulate a difference‐in‐regression discontinuity design (D‐RDD) model that addresses this concern by differencing two sets of RDD estimates across either time or location (Asfaw, 2019; Booshehri & Dugan, 2021). In the case of the presidential election, we difference RDD estimates from the elections in 2008 and 2012 with RDD estimates from 2011, which was not an election year.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do elections make you sick? Evidence from first‐time voters

Chang

Meyerhoefer

2023

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the best efforts of governments to mitigate conflict during elections, there is evidence that elections can adversely affect health. Most studies focus on mental health, finding that higher levels of psychological distress occur during campaign periods, on Election Day and following the election. For example, Lotto (2016) and Williams and Medlock (2017) suggest that the stigmatization and marginalization of minorities, immigrants and the poor in recent U.S. election campaigns led to anxiety and psychological distress among the targeted groups. Likewise, clinically significant stress was more commonly reported by young women and others who were more likely to be disadvantaged by the election outcome (DeJonckheere et al., 2018;Hagan et al., 2020).Similar levels of stress and anxiety have been documented in India, where political attacks on minority groups and liberals escalated in the run-up to the 2019 general election (Ganesan, 2018), and in Taiwan, psychiatrists reported a 30% increase in anxiety attacks and related disorders in some hospitals during the 2012 election campaign (The Telegraph, 2012). The pathology surrounding negative psychological reactions to political campaigns is so common that it has been referred to in several countries as "election syndrome" or "election stress disorder" (

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do elections make you sick? Evidence from first‐time voters

Chang

Meyerhoefer

2023

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1). Two studies evaluated the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program (SNAP) (43,44), two studies evaluated the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) (41,46), and one study evaluated the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) (45).…”

Section: Nutrition Safeguardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Authors suggest that participants face greater hardships than eligible non-participants and are therefore less likely to access medical care (44). Booshehri et al evaluated SNAP by comparing prevalence of diet-related morbidities, such as cardiovascular conditions, before and after changes to SNAP enrollment requirements at age 60 (43). The analysis applies speci cally to individuals aged 56-64 who itemized deductions on their tax return and met SNAP eligibility upon reaching age 60 (43).…”

Section: Nutrition Safeguardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Booshehri et al evaluated SNAP by comparing prevalence of diet-related morbidities, such as cardiovascular conditions, before and after changes to SNAP enrollment requirements at age 60 (43). The analysis applies speci cally to individuals aged 56-64 who itemized deductions on their tax return and met SNAP eligibility upon reaching age 60 (43). The reduction in prevalence of hypertension between ages 56-59 and 60-64 was greater for Black populations than Hispanic or White, and the reduction in prevalence of angina and stroke was greater for Hispanic populations than Black or White (43).…”

Section: Nutrition Safeguardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Structural interventions that affect racial inequities and their impact on population health outcomes: a systematic review

Clark

Cranston

Polin

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structural racism is the historical and ongoing reinforcement of racism within society due to discriminatory systems and inequitable distribution of key resources. Racism, embedded within institutional structures, processes and values, perpetuates historical injustices and restricts access to structural factors that directly impact health, such as housing, education and employment. Due to the complex and pervasive nature of structural racism, interventions that act at the structural level, rather than the individual level, are necessary to improve racial health equity. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effects of structural-level interventions on determinants of health and health outcomes for racialized populations. A total of 28 articles are included in this review, analyzing interventions such as supplemental income programs, minimum wage policies, nutrition safeguard programs, immigration-related policies, and reproductive and family-based policies. Most studies were quasi-experimental or natural experiments. Findings of studies were largely mixed, although there were clear benefits to policies that improve socioeconomic status and opportunities, and demonstrable harms from policies that restrict access to abortion or immigration. Overall, research on the effects of structural-level interventions to address health inequities is lacking, and the evidence base would benefit from well-designed studies on upstream policy interventions that effect the structural determinants of health and health inequities and improve daily living conditions.

show abstract

“…In addition, food insecurity is associated with worse health outcomes (Gundersen & Ziliak, 2021). SNAP eligibility has also been shown to reduce diet‐related disease among seniors (Booshehri & Dugan, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living with children and food insecurity in seniors

Butcher

Schmidt

Shore‐Sheppard

et al. 2022

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2019, more than 7% of seniors (ages 60+) lived with a child under the age of 18. We examine how the presence of children in senior households relates to food insecurity and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participation. We find that seniors living with children are more food insecure and have higher SNAP participation than other seniors, even after accounting for poverty status and other observable characteristics. The prevalence of multi‐generation and skip‐generation households explains, statistically, a small share of race/ethnicity gaps in food insecurity and SNAP. Changing living arrangements are an important consideration in addressing food insecurity among seniors.

show abstract

Impact of the supplemental nutritional assistance program on diet‐related disease morbidity among older adults

Cited by 9 publications

References 54 publications

Do elections make you sick? Evidence from first‐time voters

Do elections make you sick? Evidence from first‐time voters

Structural interventions that affect racial inequities and their impact on population health outcomes: a systematic review

Living with children and food insecurity in seniors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About