Suitability of the eight-item version of the Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale to identify risk groups: evidence from a nationwide representative sample

• Published in: Public health nutrition 2019-04, Vol.22 (5), p.776-784
• Main Authors: Interlenghi, Gabriela S, Reichenheim, Michael E, Segall-Corrêa, Ana M, Pérez-Escamilla, Rafael, Moraes, Claudia L, Salles-Costa, Rosana
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adequacy; Adolescents; Assessment and Methodology; Children; Chronic illnesses; Classification; Design factors; Domains; Factor analysis; Food; Food security; Households; Monte Carlo simulation; Nutrition; Quantitative psychology; Research Paper; Risk groups; Studies; Teenagers
• ISSN: 1368-9800; 1475-2727
• DOI: 10.1017/S1368980018003592

The Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale (EBIA) has eight general/adult items applied in all households and six additional items exclusively asked in households with children and/or adolescents (HHCA). Continuing an investigation programme on the adequacy of model-based cut-off points for EBIA, the present study aims to: (i) explore the capacity of properly stratifying HHCA according to food insecurity (FI) severity level by applying only the eight 'generic' items; and (ii) compare it against the fourteen-item scale. Latent class factor analysis (LCFA) models were applied to the answers to the eight general/adult items to identify latent groups corresponding to FI levels and optimal group-separating cut-off points. Analyses involved a thorough classification agreement evaluation and were performed at the national level and by macro-regions. Data derived from the cross-sectional Brazilian National Household Sample Survey of 2013. A nationally representative sample of 116 543 households. In all households and investigated domains, LCFA detected four distinct household food (in)security groups (food security and three levels of severity of FI) and the same set of cut-off points (1/2, 4/5 and 6/7). Misclassification in the aggregate data was 0·66 % in adult-only households and 1·06 % in HHCA. Comparison of the scale reduced to eight items with the 'original' fourteen-item scale demonstrated consistency in the classification. In HHCA, the agreement between both classifications was 96·2 %. Results indicate the eight 'generic' items in HHCA can be reliably used when it is not possible to apply the fourteen-item scale.