↓ Skip to main content

Food Insecurity in Older Adults: Results From the Epidemiology of Chronic Diseases Cohort Study 3

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
232 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Food Insecurity in Older Adults: Results From the Epidemiology of Chronic Diseases Cohort Study 3
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2018.00203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simone G. Fernandes, Ana M. Rodrigues, Carla Nunes, Osvaldo Santos, Maria J. Gregório, Rute Dinis de Sousa, Sara Dias, Helena Canhão

Abstract

Introduction: The public health problem of food insecurity also affects the elderly population. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of household food insecurity and its associations with chronic disease and health-related quality of life characteristics in individuals ≥65 years of age living in the community in Portugal. Methods: The data were collected from the Epidemiology of Chronic Diseases Cohort Study 3 (EpiDoC3)-Promoting Food Security Study (2015-2016), which was the third evaluation wave of the EpiDoC and represented the Portuguese adult population. Food insecurity was assessed using a psychometric scale adapted from the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale. The data on sociodemographic variables, chronic disease, and management of chronic disease were self-reported. Health-related quality of life were assessed using the European Quality of Life Survey (version validated for the Portuguese population). Logistic regression models were used to determine crude and adjusted odds ratios (for age group, gender, region, and education). The dependent variable was the perceived level of food security. Results: Among older adults, 23% were living in a food-insecure household. The odds of living in a food-insecure household were higher for individuals in the 70-74 years age group (odds ratio (OR) = 1.405, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.392-1.417), females (OR = 1.545, 95% CI 1.534-1.556), those with less education (OR = 3.355, 95% CI 3.306-3.404), low income (OR = 4,150, 95% CI 4.091-4.210), and those reporting it was very difficult to live with the current income (OR = 16.665, 95% CI 16.482-16.851). The odds of having a chronic disease were also greater among individuals living in food-insecure households: diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.832, 95% CI 1.818-1.846), pulmonary diseases (OR = 1.628, 95% CI 1.606-1.651), cardiac disease (OR = 1.329, 95% CI 1.319-1.340), obesity (OR = 1.493, 95% CI 1.477-1.508), those who reduced their frequency of medical visits (OR = 4.381, 95% CI 4.334-4.428), and who stopped taking medication due to economic difficulties (OR = 5.477, 95% CI 5.422-5.532). Older adults in food-insecure households had lower health-related quality of life (OR = 0.212, 95% CI 0.210-0.214). Conclusions: Our findings indicated that food insecurity was significantly associated with economic factors, higher values for prevalence of chronic diseases, poor management of chronic diseases, and decreased health-related quality of life in older adults living in the community.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 232 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 232 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 14%
Student > Bachelor 26 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 34 15%
Unknown 71 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 41 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 13%
Social Sciences 17 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 4%
Other 31 13%
Unknown 88 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2023.
All research outputs
#461,922
of 24,026,368 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#142
of 6,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,688
of 330,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#2
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,026,368 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,379 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,401 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.