Household food insecurity: a systematic review of the measuring instruments used in epidemiological studies

Abstract

Objective: To conduct a systematic review aimed at identifying and characterizing the experience-based household food security scales and to synthesize their psychometric properties.

Measurement of the dimensions of food insecurity in developed countries: a systematic literature review

“…Limiting to the review to published work only is a further limitation, potentially omitting new tools in development or those not yet tested. The findings of the present systematic review, in conjunction with previous work by Marques et al (2014) (17) and Keenan et al (2001) (42) , may be used to guide decisions by practitioners, researchers and policy makers regarding the measurement and monitoring of food insecurity.…”

“…The FSSM provides the most comprehensive assessment of this dimension with regard to economic access to food, and is the most reliable and valid of the available tools to assess food insecurity (17,19) . Using the FSSM, the prevalence of food insecurity in the USA and Canada has most recently been reported as 14·5 % and 12·5 %, respectively (34,35) .…”

Household food insecurity and early childhood development: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…These scales (Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM), Core Food Security Module (CFSM), Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS), and Household Food Security Scale (HHFS)) assess HFI based on the experience by the respondents of food deprivation, poor dietary quality, and corresponding coping skills in the household (Pérez‐Escamilla et al, ). These scales have been validated and are used in many countries worldwide to measure HFI (Marques, Reichenheim, de Moraes, Antunes, & Salles‐Costa, ; Pérez‐Escamilla et al, ; Saha et al, ).…”

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

“…The most widely utilised multiitem tool is the eighteen-item US Department of Agriculture Food Security Survey Module (USDA FSSM) (20)(21)(22) . The USDA FSSM has previously undergone multiple, rigorous validations and is known to be a valid and reliable tool for use among a broad variety of populations and population subgroups in varying contexts (23) . However, one critique of the USDA FSSM is that it assesses only one dimension of food security (economic access), failing to account for the other three.…”