Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

[Food insecurity in quilombola communities in Marajó, Brazilian Amazon: prevalence and associated factors].

Created on 29 Jul 2026

Authors

Regiane Padilha Dos Santos, Victória Brioso Tavares, Maria Fernanda Brito de Matos, Socorro Castelo-Branco

Published in

Cadernos de saude publica. Volume 42. Pages e00171825. Epub Jul 27, 2026.

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the prevalence of food insecurity in Marajoara quilombola communities and its associated factors. A cross-sectional, community-based, family-approach study was carried out with 434 families in Salvaterra, Marajó Island, Pará, Brazil, from June to July 2021. A household survey was carried out with a standardized questionnaire on sociodemographic data and the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale. A multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze associated factors. Most quilombola families (88.9%) lied in food insecurity, 33.1% (n = 144) of whom in severe insecurity; 21.4% (n = 93), in moderate insecurity; and 34.3% (n = 149), in mild insecurity. The regression model showed that receiving no pension doubles the chance of mild food insecurity and multiplies moderate+severe insecurity by 5 times. Per capita family income below 1/5 or even 1/3 of the minimum wage increase the chance of moderate+severe insecurity by 9 and 9 times, respectively. Households in the B/C economic classification were 21% less likely to have moderate+severe insecurity than those with the D/E classification. Food insecurity had a high prevalence in quilombola families, with a preponderance of moderate+severe insecurity. Family income and its components configured the main factors associated with food insecurity.

PMID:
42524987
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 29 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 6
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement