| Literature DB >> 35410187 |
M Patrizia Santos1, Jessica D Brewer2, Miguel A Lopez2, Valerie A Paz-Soldan3,4, M Pia Chaparro5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: From 2014-2019, Latin America and the Caribbean had the fastest growth of moderate-to-severe food insecurity than any other region, rising from 22.9% to 31.7%. While the prevalence of food insecurity is higher among women than men in every continent, Latin America has the largest food insecurity gender gap. Factors contributing to this gender inequity include underrepresentation of women in formal employment, heightened burden of dependent care on women, and unequal compensation of labor for women vs. men. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between the gender of the head of the household, employment status of household members, and food insecurity in households with children in a low-income district of Lima, Peru.Entities:
Keywords: Gender Equity; Household food insecurity; Peru
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35410187 PMCID: PMC8996213 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-12889-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Sociodemographic characteristics of included households from Villa El Salvador (Peru), by food security status (N = 329)
| Age | Years | 39.31(12.37) | 36.96 (11.24) | 37.35 (12.31) | 44.16 (13.06) |
| Weekly household food per person | Peruvian soles | 43.04 (19.97) | 37.92 (14.90) | 36.42 (13.52) | 30.84 (14.35) |
| Gender | Women | 64 (85.33) | 45 (91.84) | 77 (97.47) | 117 (92.86) |
| Education | < High school graduate | 11 (14.67) | 7 (14.29) | 21 (26.58) | 58 (46.03) |
| High school graduate | 24 (32.00) | 23 (46.94) | 28 (35.44) | 40 (31.75) | |
| Some college or technical school | 40 (53.33) | 19 (38.78) | 30 (37.97) | 28 (22.22) | |
| Employment of household head | Not employed | 44 (58.67) | 35 (69.39) | 52 (65.82) | 84 (66.67) |
| Self-employed | 23 (30.67) | 10 (20.41) | 17 (21.52) | 29 (23.02) | |
| Formally employed | 8 (10.67) | 5 (10.20) | 10 (13.25) | 13 (10.32) | |
| Household level employment statusa | < 50% of household members employed | 10 (13.33) | 10 (20.41) | 16 (20.25) | 22 (17.46) |
| 50% of household members employed | 25 (33.33) | 16 (32.65) | 29 (36.71) | 45 (35.71) | |
| > 50% of household members employed | 40 (53.33) | 23 (46.94) | 34 (43.04) | 59 (46.83) | |
| Neighborhood income strata | Lower income block | 19 (18.27) | 14 (13.46) | 26 (25.00) | 45 (43.27) |
| Lower-middle income block | 29 (23.97) | 21 (17.36) | 28 (23.14) | 43 (35.54) | |
| Middle income block | 27 (25.96) | 14 (13.46) | 25 (24.04) | 38 (36.54) | |
aHousehold-level employment status includes those formally employed and self-employed
Note: Neighborhood income percentages is calculated by row, not column
Results of the multivariable logistic regression models predicting household food insecurity by gender of household head
| Man vs. Woman Household Heada | 2.81 (1.06, 7.45) | 2.58 (1.05, 6.38) |
| Not employed vs. Formally employeda | 1.64 (0.64, 4.21) | |
| Self-employed vs. Formally employeda | 0.99 (0.49, 2.00) | |
| < 50% vs. > 50% of household members employeda | 1.26 (0.56, 2.85) | |
| 50% vs > 50% of household members employeda | 1.16 (0.63, 2.15) | |
| < 50% vs 50% of household members employeda | 1.08 (0.46, 2.55) | |
| 1.00 (0.98, 1.03) | 1.00 (0.98, 1.03) | |
| < High school graduate vs. ≥ Some college or technical schoola | 3.37 (1.54, 7.39) | 3.18 (1.46, 6.94) |
| High school graduate vs. ≥ Some college or technical schoola | 2.25 (1.20, 4.21) | 2.26 (1.17, 4.39) |
| 0.97 (0.96, 0.99) | 0.97 (0.96, 0.99) | |
Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit Test | χ2 = 4.06 df = 8 | χ2 = 4.84 df = 8 |
aIndicated reference group