High prevalence of food insecurity, the adverse impact of COVID-19 in Brazilian favela

  1. Catarina V Manfrinato
  2. Aluízio Marino
  3. Vitória F Condé
  4. Maria do Carmo P Franco
  5. Elke Stedefeldt
  6. Luciana Y Tomita

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objective:

To investigate food insecurity (FI) prevalence in two favelas in Brazil in the early weeks of the social distancing policy, from 27 March 2020 to 1 June 2020.

Design:

A cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire to elicit information on socio-economic and demographic characteristics, the types of stores visited to buy food, and FI screening. The FI experience was evaluated according to the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale. Factors associated with moderate or severe FI were investigated using the logistic regression model.

Setting:

São Paulo city, Brazil.

Participants:

Totally, 909 householders.

Results:

Eighty-eight per cent of the households included young women working as cleaners or kitchen assistants and in sales services. One-fifth of the participants were involved in the federal cash transfer programme, called Bolsa Família. There were 92 % households with children. The most frequent experience reported was uncertainty about food acquisition or receiving more (89 %), eating less than one should (64 %), not being able to eat healthy and nutritious food (46 %), and skipping a meal (39 %). Forty-seven per cent of the participants experienced moderate or severe FI. Factors associated with moderate and severe FI were low income, being a Bolsa Família recipient, having a low level of education and living in a household without children.

Conclusions:

Half of the participants experienced moderate or severe FI, and almost 10 % experienced hunger. Our data suggest that families with children were at a lower risk of moderate to severe FI. It is possible that nationally established social programmes such as Bolsa Família were protecting those families.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.31.20166157: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the Universidade Federal de São Paulo and the Medical Ethical Committees of the participating hospitals (CAAE 30805520.7.0000.5505).
    Consent: Online consent was obtained from all participants.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14.0. (Texas, USA).
    STATA
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    The limitations of the present study should be considered. It is a cross-sectional study, and no temporality and causality can be inferred. No statistical probabilistic sample was drawn since the population size of the communities in question is unknown. The web questionnaire was shared between both communities through local acting non-profit organisations and community leaders. It is possible that it reached many households due to their high capillarity and relevance to social policy. However, families that are going hungry could be under-represented since they may not have an internet plan or mobile phone. The present study showed the importance and swift impact of social distancing in São Paulo’s favelas. These findings should be considered when designing and implementing social policy intended to act fast, closing family farming to socially vulnerable communities, as well as implementing assistance programs, especially for households without children, who are more likely to go hungry.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1017/s1368980020005261
  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.31.20166157v1 on medRxiv