Comparative Analysis of Dietary Intake Among University of Florida Students: Food Pantry Users vs. Non-Users

Comparative Analysis of Dietary Intake Among University of Florida Students: Food Pantry Users vs. Non-Users | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Comparative Analysis of Dietary Intake Among University of Florida Students: Food Pantry Users vs. Non-Users Jose David Puell Jr. This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v2 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 2 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Show more versions Abstract Food insecurity among college students has a significant impact on academic institutions as rates of food insecurity among students are consistently and substantially higher than the general U.S. population. This study investigates the relationship between dietary intake and food insecurity risk factors among University of Florida students who use the campus food pantry compared to those who do not. A mixed-methods approach was performed, including semi-structured interviews and surveys incorporating the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24). Pantry users were found to have experienced higher levels of food insecurity and housing instability than their non-user peers. They also reported a greater impact on their academic performance in relation to diet. Qualitative feedback highlighted logistical barriers such as long wait times, limited hours, and inconsistent stock. The dietary analysis found minor differences in the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) scores between groups, with pantry users showing slightly higher vegetable intake bordering on significance, possibly due to produce supplied by the UF/IFAS Field & Fork Farm and Gardens and the process of cooking for oneself. However, these differences were not statistically significant. Suggestions collected by participants include extending hours, ensuring consistent stock, implementing a point system for more frequent visits, and improving communication about restocking schedules. Additionally, communicating with pantry users on their preferences for stock could enhance satisfaction and reduce food waste. Future research should explore the long-term impacts of food pantry usage on dietary quality and the experiences of students experiencing food insecurity to uncover further nuance. Food Science & Technology Nutrition & Dietetics Health Economics & Outcomes Research Sociology Food insecurity Campus food pantry ASA24 Healthy Eating Index Dietary intake assessment Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Background Food insecurity among college students has been well documented for decades, with rates of approximately 31–41% for all college students and up to 50% for undergraduates at certain institutions—compared to the 13% of the United States general population 3 . Food insecurity has been primarily associated with lower GPAs, even when controlling for high school performance. Many more academic disparities can be found among First Generation students, who have 47.2% odds of completing their college degree vs 59.3% among First-Gen students who have not experienced food insecurity; this is especially worth noting when the former is compared to non-First-Gen students who have not experienced food insecurity with 75.5% likelihood of completing their degree 7 . These clear disparities have legitimized institutions’ desire and need to address food insecurity on college campuses. Although many researchers have examined the nutritional outcomes and biopsychosocial stress associated with food insecurity, a growing body of literature is now focusing on how to accurately assess food insecurity and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. Research Focused on Methods of Assessing Food Insecurity/Diet Analysis Traditional self-report instruments are often used to gauge food security status, yet these measures can be limited by recall and social desirability bias. Bruening et al. 1 found that self-reported food security scales are vulnerable to such biases and stressed the importance of supplementing these tools with “objective measures.” While not as objective as direct observation, El Zein et al. 2 examined a 24-hour dietary recall method to obtain data on nutrient intake among college students and found that while the overall caloric intake may be deemed adequate, the quality of food/meeting healthy eating values is often suboptimal. Chodur et al. 3 similarly found that students experiencing food insecurity are less likely to consume fresh fruits and vegetables, likely to relying on accessible “junk food,’ i.e. energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods (P < 0.01). Researchers have also compared different dietary analysis tools, such as the ASA24 and INTAKE24 platforms, which have been found to be valuable tools. These tools essentially create a digital version of the 24-hour dietary recall and add helpful additions such as allowing participants to utilize a database of tens of thousands of food, beverages, and supplements instead of listing every ingredient and nutrition fact by hand 6 . There are differences in user interface and data processing, which can lead to variable results, with most users preferring INTAKE24 for ease of use 6 . Carter et al. 4 emphasized that online dietary recall tools reduce interviewer bias; however, due to interviewer-led recalls being the past standard, technical issues may limit their widespread adoption. However, Subar et al. 10 compared automated approaches to subject-written recall and observed increased consistency and data quality when employing automated systems, suggesting that these problems might be worth the training and widespread adoption. Although thorough interview-led dietary recalls offer important information about nutrient intake, these studies highlight the need for researchers to standardize procedures in order to assess interventions effectively and consistently. Research on Proposed Solutions and Intervention Strategies Beyond measurement, researchers have also proposed various solutions to address campus food insecurity. Idehai et al. 9 conducted a systematic review of campus food pantry usage and found that when dietary assessment methods were employed, studies were better able to detect improvements in students’ nutrient intake following intervention programs. These studies suggest that integrating dietary analysis with assessing the needs and improvements of those at risk for food insecurity can provide a more robust evaluation of program efficacy and, therefore, more easily define the institutional support required. Wolfson et al. 7 examined the broader impact of food insecurity on academic outcomes and noted that while food pantries provide immediate relief, they were not significantly correlated with addressing long-term nutritional inadequacies. Their findings indicate that interventions must be comprehensive and include nutritional education programs alongside food assistance. In a similar vein, Wolfson et al 8 linked depression, stress, and anxiety to nutritional deficiencies and food insecurity. The findings of Carter et al. 4 imply that successful interventions should also address the psychosocial dimensions of food insecurity by incorporating stress-reduction strategies and mental health support; to which it might be beneficial to see how educational institutions may reduce possible stressors for these students as well. Comparing these recommendations shows areas of consensus among studies; interventions that combine direct food assistance with ongoing education or social support more comprehensively address the issues behind food insecurity. However, the methods used to evaluate these interventions vary considerably. For example, while Idehai et al. 9 advocated for integrating “objective dietary measures” into intervention assessments, Wolfson et al. 7 focused on correlating food insecurity with long-term academic outcomes and, therefore, did not isolate dietary intake as a variable. When conducting any research on food insecurity, institutions need to take into account a number of aspects, including the severity, direct causes of food insecurity, the demographics of relevant populations, and the goals of intervention programs. Evaluation of Methods to Study Interventions The literature shows that the use of dietary analysis methods, particularly 24-hour dietary recalls, offers valuable insights into the quality and quantity of nutrient intake among students experiencing food insecurity. Studies by El Zein et al. 2 and Chodur et al. 3 consistently report that students experiencing food insecurity have poorer nutritional quality diets despite adequate caloric intake. However, variability in dietary recall methods, as reported by Carter et al. 4 and Subar et al. 10 , presents challenges for cross-study comparisons at the current time. Therefore, a useful definition of desired primary outcomes is necessary: micronutrient deficiencies, overall diet quality, psychosocial burden, etc. This would directly inform whether to use the granular nutritional data alongside stress/barrier assessments. Carter et al. 4 found that digital platforms can reduce interviewer bias, but user design and convenience of use are still important. For campuses with a student body used to surveys and online assessments, fully automated systems like ASA24 may be appropriate. However, universities serving disenfranchised or less digital campuses may prefer a hybrid model that involves initial or periodic interviewer support. This tiered method enables institutions to pilot test several systems, evaluating usability metrics, data integrity, and participant satisfaction before full-scale deployment. Field & Fork and Study Aims Alan and Cathy Hitchcock ran a successful chain of grocery stores in North Central Florida and, shortly before 2015, had begun to retire. 11 Wanting to give back to Alan’s alma mater, they started talking to relevant staff and faculty at the University of Florida, such as Anna Prizzia, the UF Campus Food Systems Coordinator. Applying knowledge from their studies and careers, they created the Field & Fork Campus Food program to try and support the students at risk for or experiencing food insecurity. This program includes the UF/IFAS Field & Fork Farm and Gardens, under which students can volunteer or intern to help manage and work on the square-acre farm; students may learn a significant amount about agronomics and agriculture as a career or hobby. This is relevant for this paper because most of their organic harvests directly supplement the fresh produce available at Alan and Cathy Hitchcock Field & Fork Pantry. Due to the farm’s harvest being reliant on the season and being too small to consistently fill the pantry, they also operate off a budget, where the pantry can purchase staple foods such as frozen produce, bread, fruits, canned foods, etc. Additionally, they receive donations from local supermarkets like Publix or Winn-Dixie for foodstuff that they simply have in excess or are too close to their expiration date to be put on store shelves. This past Fall semester, I interned at the Field & Fork Farm and Gardens for my health disparities practicum; at times, I would interact with the pantry and other local organizations that attempt to address food insecurity. These experiences led me to investigate the literature on the impacts of college food pantries and found that the published research using dietary analysis was fairly limited. Although previous research has looked into the prevalence of food insecurity among college students and the effectiveness of individual interventions like campus food pantries and nutritional education, there is still a need for research that applies dietary assessment to ensure that they remain effective. I wanted to see if the program’s structure had unique benefits that would reveal themselves through dietary analysis, especially since the pantry includes fresh produce harvested on campus. As such, in this paper, I intend to use 24-hour dietary recall methods and accompanying surveys to assess the demographics of food insecurity, benefits or barriers to using the pantry, and compare the diet of students who use the pantry versus those who do not. The pantry also serves faculty and staff; however, I intend to largely understand how the experience of being a student is affected by food insecurity/pantry use. Methods Defining Study Methods and Interviews This project’s primary objective was to create a mixed-methods study comparing dietary intake and food insecurity risk factors between University of Florida students who utilize the campus food pantry and those who do not. The population of students was defined as any undergraduate, graduate, or professional student enrolled at UF, while pantry user was largely a self-identifying variable. I first attempted to engage in semi-structured interviews with pantry users to decide what my study should include in its survey with regard to data considerations and general context. I placed flyers with my contact information, IRB number, and a short description of my project within the pantry; 5 people agreed to interviews and were fairly evenly distributed between virtual and in-person. Some interview participants stressed logistical issues such as "low stock of protein" and "2–3 hour waits on the days after heavy restocks," which are consistent with Idehai et al.'s systematic review 9 , identifying inventory inconsistency as a key barrier for campus pantries. These findings prompted the addition of Likert-scale items measuring subjective ease of use and satisfaction with pantry variety ("How satisfied are you with the variety of food options?") and multi-select options for barriers (including "limited hours," "distance/transportation," etc.) to ensure the survey addressed the logistical impact of the pantry's structure. Furthermore, themes of cultural mismatch (“few foods match my home cuisine”) and meeting dietary restrictions (“limited Halal options”) informed my decision to include open-text prompts and suggestions for pantry improvements. These themes reflect how students experiencing food insecurity often face a disconnect between their pantry offerings and cultural or health needs. Additionally, a few interview subjects emphasized a need by pantry users to sometimes prioritize “quantity over quality.” Due to the pantry allowing one visit per week and being freshly stocked when opening on Thursday mornings, many people understand that their only chance to have the widest variety of foodstuff is on those mornings. As a result, long wait times are common—sometimes lasting up to 2–3 hours. Some even noted mainly wanting canned meals due to the ease of preparing them during periods of academic stress, mirroring findings that link food insecurity to nutrient-poor dietary compromises 8 . Overall, those 5 interviews deeply informed my methodology for the rest of this project, with the most respect to my Qualtrics survey questions. Survey Design and ASA24 Dietary Recall Having been informed by existing food insecurity assessment methods, I then applied my added insights from interviews to create the survey. Demographic questions gathered information about the year of college, first-generation status, and international student status. Food insecurity was assessed using modified questions from the USDA Food Security Survey Module, such as "Within the past 6 months, I worried whether our food would run out before we got money to buy more" and "Within the past 6 months, I had to skip meals because I could not afford enough food." 1 The answer options were "never true," "sometimes true," and "often true." Housing insecurity was assessed using comparable response formats to ensure uniformity throughout the survey. The academic impact questions used 5-point Likert scales to measure agreement with statements like "I feel that my diet contributes to my academic success" (strongly disagree to strongly agree) and frequency items like "In the past 6 months, how often have you felt that difficulty accessing healthy food has negatively impacted your academic performance?" (never true to often true); these questions aimed to address the academic repercussions of food insecurity, which Wolfson et al. 7 highlighted in their study of degree achievement. Pantry-specific questions measured accessibility ("How easy is it for you to access the Field and Fork pantry?"), satisfaction with food variety, and barriers to use. Options for pantry barriers were presented as a multi-select question including "limited hours," "distance/transportation issues," "stigma," "limited food variety," and "long wait times." Open-text fields enabled participants to expound on their experiences and recommend changes. Furthermore, certain questions were only asked to their applicable groups, such as “How confident are you in preparing balanced meals with foodstuff from the pantry,” only being set to appear if someone responded “Yes” to “Do you use the Field and Fork Pantry?” The ASA24 system uses a multi-pass approach to lead participants through a full recollection of all foods and beverages taken within the previous 24 hours. Participants initially report on all eating occasions and foods consumed, then answer comprehensive questions about portion sizes and preparation techniques. The system features a database of tens of thousands of meals and beverages, as well as graphics to help with portion size estimation. To manage participant access to ASA24, I utilized Qualtrics’s quota feature to assign unique usernames and passwords to each respondent and remove the pair of credentials from the list once the ASA24 is submitted. A pool of 30 pre-generated ASA24 login credentials was created and distributed to participants as they progressed through the survey. Embedded HTML code (iframe) created a window of the ASA24 within the survey. Text at the top pulled from the credentials database and would reveal these credentials to participants, along with directions for completing the dietary recall questionnaire. This method eliminates the requirement for participants to register separately for ASA24 or open it in another tab, expediting the data collection process and potentially increasing completion rates. The ASA24 itself was fairly simple and required surprisingly little set-up. After making a free researcher account, I could review the various additional questions available, such as location or phone/computer use while eating. Out of the optional question sets, I included the source of the meal (homemade, restaurant, etc.) and dietary supplement questions, as being reminded of where one received their meal may allow them to double-check that they reported everything as accurately to their memory as possible—while not taking up too much participant time 6 . Otherwise, all the dietary analysis questions were handled by the ASA24, including the creation of a dietary overview for the participants to review the same data I received of total nutrient and micronutrient intake, and their comparison with the recommended values. This data can then be inputted into an ASA24 provided SAS macro that will calculate a Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score via a rubric (Fig. 1 ) for each participant. INTAKE24 was initially considered as an alternative dietary assessment tool based on findings by Mackenzie et al. 6 suggesting higher user satisfaction. However, INTAKE24 required administrative approval with a turnaround time that conflicted with my study timeline. After waiting several days for an administrator answer with no resolution, I chose ASA24 due to its instant availability and validation in US populations. Before disseminating the Qualtrics QR code, I tested the integrated survey by filling it out myself to ensure clarity, flow, and technical functionality. The full survey took about 10–20 minutes to complete, including both the questionnaire replies and the dietary recall portion. The survey was published on the morning of 3/20/25 and kept open for a week. Promotion of the survey involved flyering around popular spaces on campus, the r/UFL Reddit, and asking people exiting the pantry if they were interested in supporting pantry science via a survey. Results Demographics and Participant Characteristics A total of 25 participants completed the survey, consisting of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students from the University of Florida. Among the respondents, 40% were first-generation students, and 24% were international students. The distribution across academic years was 20% freshmen, 24% sophomores, 28% juniors, 16% seniors, and 12% graduate/professional students. Food Insecurity and Housing Instability Food insecurity was more prevalent among pantry users compared to non-users (Fig. 2 ). The following data is displayed as it was analyzed, with the survey option for “often true” as 3, “sometimes true” as 2, and “never true” as 1. Pantry users reported significantly higher levels of concern about exhausting their sources of food (Mean = 1.75, SD = 0.68) compared to non-users (Mean = 1.21, SD = 0.43; p = 0.0149). Similarly, pantry users more frequently indicated that food purchased did not last (Mean = 1.75, SD = 0.77) than non-users (Mean = 1.21, SD = 0.43; p = 0.0254). Additionally, skipping meals due to financial constraints was more common among pantry users (Mean = 1.81, SD = 0.83) compared to non-users (Mean = 1.21, SD = 0.43; p = 0.0192). Regarding housing instability, pantry users indicated greater concern about losing housing (Mean = 1.44, SD = 0.63) compared to non-users (Mean = 1.08, SD = 0.28), though this difference was borderline significant (p = 0.0518). Difficulty paying rent or mortgage was also more frequently reported by pantry users (Mean = 1.63, SD = 0.72) versus non-users (Mean = 1.14, SD = 0.53, p = 0.0451). Academic Impact Pantry users reported a slightly higher negative impact on academic performance (Fig. 3 ) due to food access issues (Mean = 1.94, SD = 0.68) compared to non-users (Mean = 1.54, SD = 0.78), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.1587). The Likert scale applied to the statement "I feel that my diet contributes to my academic success" was strongly agreed to among pantry users (Mean = 5, SD = 0), but the difference between groups was not statistically significant when compared to non-users (Mean = 4.43, SD = .98, p = 0.1723). Pantry Accessibility and Satisfaction Among pantry users, the ease of accessing the Field and Fork pantry was rated as follows: extremely easy (16%), somewhat easy (40%), neither easy nor difficult (32%), and somewhat difficult (12%). Satisfaction with the variety of food options varied, with responses indicating extreme satisfaction (12%), somewhat satisfied (40%), neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (36%), and somewhat dissatisfied (12%). Pantry users commonly experienced difficulties such as limited hours, distance/transportation issues, stigma, limited food selection, and long wait times. Open-text responses noted specific logistical issues, such as "low protein stock" and "2–3 hour waits on the days after heavy restocks." Some participants cited cultural differences and food limitations as impediments. Non-pantry users also had the opportunity to share why they had not utilized the pantry. The most common reason was a lack of perceived need for the pantry (40%). Some participants were entirely unaware of the pantry’s existence (24%), while others felt that it was inaccessible to them (20%). A few respondents noted it was primarily stigma or embarrassment associated with not using the pantry (8%). Interestingly, when asked if they would consider using the pantry in the future, a significant portion of non-users (48%) indicated that they would. Dietary Intake and Healthy Eating Index (HEI) Out of the initial survey respondents, only 15 participants completed the ASA24 dietary recall component. This discrepancy may have occurred because some participants opened the ASA24 tab but did not complete it immediately, leading to username conflicts when another participant claimed and logged in with the same credentials later. Additionally, some participants may have accidentally or intentionally skipped the dietary recall portion due to the only thing blocking their progress within the survey being to select the button that they had completed the ASA24. To address potential biases and variability in the small sample size, I performed bootstrapping on the HEI data using R in Posit Cloud. Bootstrapping is a resampling technique that helps estimate the distribution of a statistic by sampling with replacement from the original data set. This method was chosen to provide a more robust estimate of dietary intake and ensure that the results remained reliable despite the limited sample size. The bootstrapped analysis (Fig. 4 ) revealed that pantry users had a slightly higher average HEI total score (Mean = 47.44, SD = 19.58) compared to non-users (Mean = 45.63, SD = 11.99), although this difference was almost statistically random (p = 0.8886). Qualitative Feedback Several participants mentioned long wait times as a significant barrier, being reported by six participants. Four respondents mentioned issues with transportation. Some participants pointed out that available food items did not match their cultural preferences or dietary restrictions: "Few foods match my home cuisine" and "Limited Halal options.”. Five participants noted limited hours of operation: “During the times I am able to go, there is almost always nothing left on the shelves.” Although quantitative results indicated fairly positive satisfaction levels for groups regarding food variety, qualitative responses contained common themes: "Low stock of protein" and "Limited food variety" were mentioned by four and three participants, respectively. Participants recommended extending pantry hours and ensuring stock remains consistent throughout the week: "Implement a point system for checking out to allow more frequent visits with a cumulative limit," was suggested as a potential improvement for the service. Another suggestion was that when unable to maintain consistent stocking, to share possible limited supply notifications on the pantry social media page via story or post. Relationship Between First-Generation and International Student Status with Survey Data First-generation students reported higher levels of food insecurity compared to their peers, with a mean concern about food running out (Mean = 1.90, SD = 0.70) compared to non-first-generation students (Mean = 1.34, SD = 0.48); skipping meals due to lack of affordability was also higher (Mean = 2.00, SD = 0.71) compared to non-first-generation students (Mean = 1.41, SD = 0.50). International students also reported unique barriers related to cultural food preferences, with comments such as "Few foods match my home cuisine" and "Limited Kosher/Halal options," reflecting the challenges of finding culturally appropriate foods. When comparing HEI scores among these groups, first-generation students had an average HEI score of 50.12 (SD = 16.84); Non-first-generation students had an average HEI score of 45.78 (SD = 15); International students had an average HEI score of 46.24 (SD = 17) Discussion Impact on Vulnerable Student Populations The findings of this study show that food insecurity disproportionately affects non-traditional students, such as first-generation and international students. First-generation students reported a significantly higher prevalence of concern about depleting their access to food and more frequent skipping of meals due to financial constraints. They also reported a higher impact of their diet on their academics. International students were shown to have lower HEI and higher housing instability, further compounding the biopsychosocial dimensions behind nutritional challenges. These findings emphasize how these groups exhibit a need for targeted supported strategies and require fundamental resources to succeed academically and maintain their overall well-being. Evaluation of Pantry Effectiveness The Field and Fork Campus Food Pantry demonstrated success in alleviating food insecurity among its students by providing access to fresh produce and other nutritious food at a level about equivalent to students who do not utilize the pantry and/or experience limited food insecurity. It is worth noting that pantry users had higher total vegetable intake compared to non-users; this can possibly be attributed to both access to frozen vegetables and the contribution of the UF/IFAS Field and Fork Farm and Gardens for supplying fresh produce. The integration of these structures likely caused the enhanced nutritional quality of diet in our sample. Several barriers to pantry access and use were identified that could limit the pantry’s effectiveness. These include long wait times, limited hours, transportation challenges, and inconsistent stock. These barriers could exacerbate the stress/cognitive load experienced by students experiencing food insecurity and, therefore, could negate some of the positive impacts of proper nutrition. Additionally, the stigma associated with pantry use and a general lack of awareness of the pantry on campus further hinders its utilization by those who might benefit most from it. Diet and HEI Despite minor differences in the HEI sub-scores between pantry users and non-pantry users, none of these differences were statistically significant. Pantry users had a slightly higher average HEI score than non-users, but this difference was almost statistically random. There may be some dietary benefits to the pantry as the pantry users had a higher HEI vegetable sub-score with borderline significance (p = 0.0632). However, pantry users also had lower total fruit intake than non-users; this could be due to a multitude of factors such as limited availability, variety of fruits not aligning with preference, or other food items being perceived as more filling or convenient. Qualitative Feedback Long wait periods, limited hours, transportation concerns, and cultural differences between accessible food items were all common themes. Participants suggested expanding pantry hours, more accurate stock management, and creating a point system for more frequent visits with a cumulative limit. Furthermore, some participants suggested using social media to alert students of low supplies or resupply timelines, especially before academic breaks, during which the pantry remains closed. These observations are consistent with prior research emphasizing the need for comprehensive and culturally aware food assistance programs 7 , 9 . Conclusion Recommendations for Improvement I intend to synthesize a few recommendations based on participant feedback to enhance the effectiveness of the Field and Fork Campus Food Pantry and better support students experiencing food insecurity. These recommendations are clearly limited by budget, volunteer/staff labor, and institutional support; however, they could actively enhance the performance of not only students but the University of Florida’s campus community as a whole. Firstly, ensuring consistent stock throughout the week would address most of the concerns brought up by pantry users. One of the most coherent ideas is the implementation of a point system for checking out that would allow for more frequent visits, likely at varying times throughout the week, to avoid overwhelming the pantry’s resources or space—therefore also reducing wait times. Examples of this system are sparse, but one that seemed especially intuitive was the San Joaquin Delta College Student Food Pantry Point System 12 . I reached out to their campus pantry via e-mail and learned that the system began by allotting students 100 points at the beginning of a semester, with a maximum use of 16 points per week (Fig. 6 ). 1 point for individually wrapped items (granola bars, instant ramen, mac & cheese), 2 for complete meals (salads, frozen meals, soups), 3 points for multiple meal items (milk, bread, cheese, rice, pasta), and 8 points for clothing, hygiene products, and school products. However, it is worth noting that their policies have since been updated due to significant increases in pantry usage each semester on their campus (Fig. 7 ). 8 point items are no longer offered at the pantry and can instead be found at other campus resource centers, which has made room for expanded food inventory and variety. Additionally, this increased demand led to a once-a-week limit on pantry users and a restriction on duplicate items to avoid quickly running out of essential groceries. There is an exception/bonus for those who bring in reusable bags, as they receive an additional 2 points that they can apply to either a duplicate 2 point item, or 2 duplicate 1 point items. Although somewhat arbitrary in theory, this could serve as a solid foundation for adapting a point system that would materially benefit the UF pantry. An alternative would largely be to significantly boost the budget and capacity to store foodstuff in order to consistently meet campus demand in an unaltered manner. Secondly, improving communication through social media or listserv updates about restocking schedules/available supplies could help relieve some of the uncertainty surrounding the pantry and help pantry users effectively plan their visits. This outreach can be paired with integrating nutritional education and support into food assistance to address both acute nutritional needs and long-term academic/psychosocial outcomes. As a result, students can develop healthy eating habits and manage stress more effectively. Drawing from Morrow et al.’s study 13 on “optimizing food pantry stocking through client preferences,” it could also be beneficial to align offerings with the preferences of those who use the pantry. By analyzing and understanding food preferences and categorizing food items accordingly, the pantry can optimize its stocking to meet the needs of the people who use it while minimizing food waste. This approach is likely internalized to a degree by volunteers and staff; however, a more standardized approach, such as that followed in the study, could be useful to further improve offerings, including the previously mentioned culturally or religiously relevant foods. This approach could not only improve operational efficiency but also enhance general satisfaction. However, it is worth noting that many shelves are stocked via donation only, so there would likely need to be supplemental donations or added/altered budget to take these preferences into account. Study Limitations and Future Research Due to the relatively small sample size and potential biases/misunderstandings in self-reported data, the generalizability of these results to other campuses is extremely limited and moderately limited on the UF campus. Furthermore, because the ASA24 is a 24-hour dietary recall, the nutrition found among the sample could be unusual, impacted by my promotion methods, simply inputted falsely to quicken the completion of the survey upon the annoyance of its length, etc. While bootstrapping provided reliable estimates, larger sample sizes for longer times would significantly enhance the validity and generalizability of the findings. Future research should explore the long-term impacts of food pantry usage on dietary quality, academic outcomes, and the effectiveness of intervention strategies in addressing food insecurity among diverse student populations. Additionally, qualitative studies that further delve into the experiences of students experiencing food insecurity could uncover more nuanced barriers and facilitators. Lastly, research on the impacts of economic and state policies on vulnerable populations, especially in the completion of a college program, could inform future policymaking and address some of the fundamental issues behind food insecurity. Declarations Declarations Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and received ethical approval from the University of Florida Institutional Review Board (IRB) (approval number: [insert IRB number if available]). All participants provided written informed consent before participating in the study. Funding Declaration This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. References Bruening M, Argo K, Payne-Sturges D, Laska MN (2017) The Struggle Is Real: A Systematic Review of Food Insecurity on Postsecondary Education Campuses. J Acad Nutr Diet 117(11):1767–1791. 10.1016/j.jand.2017.05.022 El Zein A, Shelnutt KP, Colby S et al (2019) Prevalence and correlates of food insecurity among U.S. college students: a multi-institutional study. BMC Public Health. ;19(1):660. Published 2019 May 29. 10.1186/s12889-019-6943-6 Chodur G, Singh S, Riordan EE, Kalaydjian S, Martinez SM (2024) J Acad Nutr Diet 124(2):225–232e1. 10.1016/j.jand.2023.09.009 . Campus Food Pantry Use May Improve Daily Frequency of Fruit and Vegetable Intake Among California University Students Experiencing Food Insecurity Carter MC, Albar SA, Morris MA et al (2015) Development of a UK Online 24-h Dietary Assessment Tool: myfood24. Nutrients 7(6):4016–4032 Published 2015 May 27. 10.3390/nu7064016 Goldrick-Rab S, Richardson J, Schneider J, Hernandez A, Cady C (2018) Hungry and Homeless in College: results from a national study of basic needs insecurity in higher education. Wis HOPE Lab Mackenzie KM, Kerr DA, Whitton C, Talati Z, McCaffrey TA, Mullan BA (2022) Predicting Perceived Problems in Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recalls: A Quantitative Think-Aloud Study Comparing Automated Self-Assisted 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24®) and INTAKE24© in University Students. Nutrients 14(20):4281. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14204281 Wolfson JA, Insolera N, Cohen A, Leung CW (2022) The effect of food insecurity during college on graduation and type of degree attained: evidence from a nationally representative longitudinal survey. Public Health Nutr 25(2):389–397. 10.1017/S1368980021003104 Wolfson JA, Garcia T, Leung CW (2021) Food Insecurity Is Associated with Depression, Anxiety, and Stress: Evidence from the Early Days of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States. Health Equity 5(1):64–71 Published 2021 Feb 25. 10.1089/heq.2020.0059 Idehai OV, Mbaya P, Chung T, Bhurosy T (2024) A systematic review of factors associated with student use of campus food pantries: implications for addressing barriers and facilitating use. BMC Public Health 24(1):97. 10.1186/s12889-023-17583-7 Subar AF, Kirkpatrick SI, Mittl B et al (2012) The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour dietary recall (ASA24): a resource for researchers, clinicians, and educators from the National Cancer Institute. J Acad Nutr Diet 112(8):1134–1137. 10.1016/j.jand.2012.04.016 How it happened: Alan and Cathy Hitchcock Field & Fork Pantry. UF/IFAS Giving. October 2 (2023) Accessed July 1, 2024. https://blogs.ifas.ufl.edu/give/2023/10/02/how-it-happened-alan-and-cathy-hitchcock-field-fork-pantry/ San Joaquin Delta College (2025) Student Food Pantry Point System [flier]. San Joaquin Delta College, Stockton, CA Morrow BF, Davis LB, Jiang S, McCormick N (2024) Optimizing food pantry stocking through client preferences: a novel elicitation and classification process. J Humanitarian Logistics Supply Chain Manage 14(4):399–418 Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 2 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Show more versions Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6848504","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":470804577,"identity":"90708af4-c60b-4a2b-a297-a9239a459ea4","order_by":0,"name":"Jose David Puell Jr.","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7470-3186","institution":"","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jose","middleName":"David","lastName":"Puell","suffix":"Jr."}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-06-08 16:18:07","currentVersionCode":2,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v2","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v2","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":85969338,"identity":"24a85926-7d1d-4de4-86c3-4ad131b02f6d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 17:58:30","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":123245,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLegend not included with this version.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/4d44cc99796a8e34fb30a28c.png"},{"id":85969339,"identity":"ffdf03b5-df21-43dd-a6b4-7219035bf702","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 17:58:30","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":15420,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLegend not included with this version.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/3a35ffb761498a44d3e21f52.png"},{"id":85969544,"identity":"e75b2838-b221-4d76-be53-0924ce221ecf","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 18:06:30","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":13510,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLegend not included with this version.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/be0df0ce6ca7320315969cbe.png"},{"id":85969345,"identity":"4cb9479f-a8df-4d58-85f1-2cebf56e0778","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 17:58:30","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":9450,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLegend not included with this version.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/5edd48bdb93641538981a4d1.png"},{"id":85970105,"identity":"ac5b4f59-56be-4800-964d-963c550878ad","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 18:14:30","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33572,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLegend not included with this version.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/e75feb414d343dee51c0d4b1.png"},{"id":85970106,"identity":"f85f50bb-f236-4a62-a812-859f9bf6b253","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 18:14:30","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":278453,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(2023 Flier shared by The Student Food Pantry - Office of Student Life - San Joaquin Delta College\u003ca href=\"https://deltacollege.edu/sites/default/files/asdc_2019_poster_foodpantryitemlist_proof4.pdf)12\"\u003e)\u003c/a\u003e\u003ca href=\"https://deltacollege.edu/sites/default/files/asdc_2019_poster_foodpantryitemlist_proof4.pdf)12\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/970747abb4f92d692f82956b.png"},{"id":85969352,"identity":"ced9dab7-a443-4891-9551-b18534a903bb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 17:58:30","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":61543,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e2025 Flier shared by The Student Food Pantry - Office of Student Life - San Joaquin Delta College\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"f7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/d0880cc7f6868294a02448fd.png"},{"id":85970639,"identity":"330d0ad3-dd2b-48c8-9bec-ce287784dea0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-03 18:30:31","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1120537,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6848504/v2/b8316054-5ec5-43bf-8e5f-a9a7a3136def.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"Comparative Analysis of Dietary Intake Among University of Florida Students: Food Pantry Users vs. Non-Users","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eFood insecurity among college students has been well documented for decades, with rates of approximately 31\u0026ndash;41% for all college students and up to 50% for undergraduates at certain institutions\u0026mdash;compared to the 13% of the United States general population\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Food insecurity has been primarily associated with lower GPAs, even when controlling for high school performance. Many more academic disparities can be found among First Generation students, who have 47.2% odds of completing their college degree vs 59.3% among First-Gen students who have not experienced food insecurity; this is especially worth noting when the former is compared to non-First-Gen students who have not experienced food insecurity with 75.5% likelihood of completing their degree\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. These clear disparities have legitimized institutions\u0026rsquo; desire and need to address food insecurity on college campuses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough many researchers have examined the nutritional outcomes and biopsychosocial stress associated with food insecurity, a growing body of literature is now focusing on how to accurately assess food insecurity and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Research Focused on Methods of Assessing Food Insecurity/Diet Analysis","content":"\u003cp\u003eTraditional self-report instruments are often used to gauge food security status, yet these measures can be limited by recall and social desirability bias. Bruening et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that self-reported food security scales are vulnerable to such biases and stressed the importance of supplementing these tools with \u0026ldquo;objective measures.\u0026rdquo; While not as objective as direct observation, El Zein et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e examined a 24-hour dietary recall method to obtain data on nutrient intake among college students and found that while the overall caloric intake may be deemed adequate, the quality of food/meeting healthy eating values is often suboptimal. Chodur et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e similarly found that students experiencing food insecurity are less likely to consume fresh fruits and vegetables, likely to relying on accessible \u0026ldquo;junk food,\u0026rsquo; i.e. energy-dense, nutrient-poor foods (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.01).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearchers have also compared different dietary analysis tools, such as the ASA24 and INTAKE24 platforms, which have been found to be valuable tools. These tools essentially create a digital version of the 24-hour dietary recall and add helpful additions such as allowing participants to utilize a database of tens of thousands of food, beverages, and supplements instead of listing every ingredient and nutrition fact by hand\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. There are differences in user interface and data processing, which can lead to variable results, with most users preferring INTAKE24 for ease of use\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Carter et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e emphasized that online dietary recall tools reduce interviewer bias; however, due to interviewer-led recalls being the past standard, technical issues may limit their widespread adoption. However, Subar et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e compared automated approaches to subject-written recall and observed increased consistency and data quality when employing automated systems, suggesting that these problems might be worth the training and widespread adoption. Although thorough interview-led dietary recalls offer important information about nutrient intake, these studies highlight the need for researchers to standardize procedures in order to assess interventions effectively and consistently.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch on Proposed Solutions and Intervention Strategies\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeyond measurement, researchers have also proposed various solutions to address campus food insecurity. Idehai et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e conducted a systematic review of campus food pantry usage and found that when dietary assessment methods were employed, studies were better able to detect improvements in students\u0026rsquo; nutrient intake following intervention programs. These studies suggest that integrating dietary analysis with assessing the needs and improvements of those at risk for food insecurity can provide a more robust evaluation of program efficacy and, therefore, more easily define the institutional support required.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWolfson et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e examined the broader impact of food insecurity on academic outcomes and noted that while food pantries provide immediate relief, they were not significantly correlated with addressing long-term nutritional inadequacies. Their findings indicate that interventions must be comprehensive and include nutritional education programs alongside food assistance. In a similar vein, Wolfson et al\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e linked depression, stress, and anxiety to nutritional deficiencies and food insecurity. The findings of Carter et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e imply that successful interventions should also address the psychosocial dimensions of food insecurity by incorporating stress-reduction strategies and mental health support; to which it might be beneficial to see how educational institutions may reduce possible stressors for these students as well.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eComparing these recommendations shows areas of consensus among studies; interventions that combine direct food assistance with ongoing education or social support more comprehensively address the issues behind food insecurity. However, the methods used to evaluate these interventions vary considerably. For example, while Idehai et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e advocated for integrating \u0026ldquo;objective dietary measures\u0026rdquo; into intervention assessments, Wolfson et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e focused on correlating food insecurity with long-term academic outcomes and, therefore, did not isolate dietary intake as a variable. When conducting any research on food insecurity, institutions need to take into account a number of aspects, including the severity, direct causes of food insecurity, the demographics of relevant populations, and the goals of intervention programs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Evaluation of Methods to Study Interventions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe literature shows that the use of dietary analysis methods, particularly 24-hour dietary recalls, offers valuable insights into the quality and quantity of nutrient intake among students experiencing food insecurity. Studies by El Zein et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and Chodur et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e consistently report that students experiencing food insecurity have poorer nutritional quality diets despite adequate caloric intake. However, variability in dietary recall methods, as reported by Carter et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e and Subar et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, presents challenges for cross-study comparisons at the current time. Therefore, a useful definition of desired primary outcomes is necessary: micronutrient deficiencies, overall diet quality, psychosocial burden, etc. This would directly inform whether to use the granular nutritional data alongside stress/barrier assessments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarter et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that digital platforms can reduce interviewer bias, but user design and convenience of use are still important. For campuses with a student body used to surveys and online assessments, fully automated systems like ASA24 may be appropriate. However, universities serving disenfranchised or less digital campuses may prefer a hybrid model that involves initial or periodic interviewer support. This tiered method enables institutions to pilot test several systems, evaluating usability metrics, data integrity, and participant satisfaction before full-scale deployment.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Field \u0026 Fork and Study Aims","content":"\u003cp\u003eAlan and Cathy Hitchcock ran a successful chain of grocery stores in North Central Florida and, shortly before 2015, had begun to retire.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e Wanting to give back to Alan\u0026rsquo;s alma mater, they started talking to relevant staff and faculty at the University of Florida, such as Anna Prizzia, the UF Campus Food Systems Coordinator. Applying knowledge from their studies and careers, they created the Field \u0026amp; Fork Campus Food program to try and support the students at risk for or experiencing food insecurity. This program includes the UF/IFAS Field \u0026amp; Fork Farm and Gardens, under which students can volunteer or intern to help manage and work on the square-acre farm; students may learn a significant amount about agronomics and agriculture as a career or hobby. This is relevant for this paper because most of their organic harvests directly supplement the fresh produce available at Alan and Cathy Hitchcock Field \u0026amp; Fork Pantry. Due to the farm\u0026rsquo;s harvest being reliant on the season and being too small to consistently fill the pantry, they also operate off a budget, where the pantry can purchase staple foods such as frozen produce, bread, fruits, canned foods, etc. Additionally, they receive donations from local supermarkets like Publix or Winn-Dixie for foodstuff that they simply have in excess or are too close to their expiration date to be put on store shelves.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis past Fall semester, I interned at the Field \u0026amp; Fork Farm and Gardens for my health disparities practicum; at times, I would interact with the pantry and other local organizations that attempt to address food insecurity. These experiences led me to investigate the literature on the impacts of college food pantries and found that the published research using dietary analysis was fairly limited. Although previous research has looked into the prevalence of food insecurity among college students and the effectiveness of individual interventions like campus food pantries and nutritional education, there is still a need for research that applies dietary assessment to ensure that they remain effective. I wanted to see if the program\u0026rsquo;s structure had unique benefits that would reveal themselves through dietary analysis, especially since the pantry includes fresh produce harvested on campus. As such, in this paper, I intend to use 24-hour dietary recall methods and accompanying surveys to assess the demographics of food insecurity, benefits or barriers to using the pantry, and compare the diet of students who use the pantry versus those who do not. The pantry also serves faculty and staff; however, I intend to largely understand how the experience of being a student is affected by food insecurity/pantry use.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDefining Study Methods and Interviews\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis project\u0026rsquo;s primary objective was to create a mixed-methods study comparing dietary intake and food insecurity risk factors between University of Florida students who utilize the campus food pantry and those who do not. The population of students was defined as any undergraduate, graduate, or professional student enrolled at UF, while pantry user was largely a self-identifying variable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eI first attempted to engage in semi-structured interviews with pantry users to decide what my study should include in its survey with regard to data considerations and general context. I placed flyers with my contact information, IRB number, and a short description of my project within the pantry; 5 people agreed to interviews and were fairly evenly distributed between virtual and in-person. Some interview participants stressed logistical issues such as \"low stock of protein\" and \"2\u0026ndash;3 hour waits on the days after heavy restocks,\" which are consistent with Idehai et al.'s systematic review\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, identifying inventory inconsistency as a key barrier for campus pantries. These findings prompted the addition of Likert-scale items measuring subjective ease of use and satisfaction with pantry variety (\"How satisfied are you with the variety of food options?\") and multi-select options for barriers (including \"limited hours,\" \"distance/transportation,\" etc.) to ensure the survey addressed the logistical impact of the pantry's structure. Furthermore, themes of cultural mismatch (\u0026ldquo;few foods match my home cuisine\u0026rdquo;) and meeting dietary restrictions (\u0026ldquo;limited Halal options\u0026rdquo;) informed my decision to include open-text prompts and suggestions for pantry improvements. These themes reflect how students experiencing food insecurity often face a disconnect between their pantry offerings and cultural or health needs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, a few interview subjects emphasized a need by pantry users to sometimes prioritize \u0026ldquo;quantity over quality.\u0026rdquo; Due to the pantry allowing one visit per week and being freshly stocked when opening on Thursday mornings, many people understand that their only chance to have the widest variety of foodstuff is on those mornings. As a result, long wait times are common\u0026mdash;sometimes lasting up to 2\u0026ndash;3 hours. Some even noted mainly wanting canned meals due to the ease of preparing them during periods of academic stress, mirroring findings that link food insecurity to nutrient-poor dietary compromises\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Overall, those 5 interviews deeply informed my methodology for the rest of this project, with the most respect to my Qualtrics survey questions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSurvey Design and ASA24 Dietary Recall\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eHaving been informed by existing food insecurity assessment methods, I then applied my added insights from interviews to create the survey. Demographic questions gathered information about the year of college, first-generation status, and international student status. Food insecurity was assessed using modified questions from the USDA Food Security Survey Module, such as \"Within the past 6 months, I worried whether our food would run out before we got money to buy more\" and \"Within the past 6 months, I had to skip meals because I could not afford enough food.\"\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e The answer options were \"never true,\" \"sometimes true,\" and \"often true.\" Housing insecurity was assessed using comparable response formats to ensure uniformity throughout the survey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe academic impact questions used 5-point Likert scales to measure agreement with statements like \"I feel that my diet contributes to my academic success\" (strongly disagree to strongly agree) and frequency items like \"In the past 6 months, how often have you felt that difficulty accessing healthy food has negatively impacted your academic performance?\" (never true to often true); these questions aimed to address the academic repercussions of food insecurity, which Wolfson et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e highlighted in their study of degree achievement. Pantry-specific questions measured accessibility (\"How easy is it for you to access the Field and Fork pantry?\"), satisfaction with food variety, and barriers to use. Options for pantry barriers were presented as a multi-select question including \"limited hours,\" \"distance/transportation issues,\" \"stigma,\" \"limited food variety,\" and \"long wait times.\" Open-text fields enabled participants to expound on their experiences and recommend changes. Furthermore, certain questions were only asked to their applicable groups, such as \u0026ldquo;How confident are you in preparing balanced meals with foodstuff from the pantry,\u0026rdquo; only being set to appear if someone responded \u0026ldquo;Yes\u0026rdquo; to \u0026ldquo;Do you use the Field and Fork Pantry?\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe ASA24 system uses a multi-pass approach to lead participants through a full recollection of all foods and beverages taken within the previous 24 hours. Participants initially report on all eating occasions and foods consumed, then answer comprehensive questions about portion sizes and preparation techniques. The system features a database of tens of thousands of meals and beverages, as well as graphics to help with portion size estimation. To manage participant access to ASA24, I utilized Qualtrics\u0026rsquo;s quota feature to assign unique usernames and passwords to each respondent and remove the pair of credentials from the list once the ASA24 is submitted. A pool of 30 pre-generated ASA24 login credentials was created and distributed to participants as they progressed through the survey. Embedded HTML code (iframe) created a window of the ASA24 within the survey. Text at the top pulled from the credentials database and would reveal these credentials to participants, along with directions for completing the dietary recall questionnaire. This method eliminates the requirement for participants to register separately for ASA24 or open it in another tab, expediting the data collection process and potentially increasing completion rates.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe ASA24 itself was fairly simple and required surprisingly little set-up. After making a free researcher account, I could review the various additional questions available, such as location or phone/computer use while eating. Out of the optional question sets, I included the source of the meal (homemade, restaurant, etc.) and dietary supplement questions, as being reminded of where one received their meal may allow them to double-check that they reported everything as accurately to their memory as possible\u0026mdash;while not taking up too much participant time\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Otherwise, all the dietary analysis questions were handled by the ASA24, including the creation of a dietary overview for the participants to review the same data I received of total nutrient and micronutrient intake, and their comparison with the recommended values. This data can then be inputted into an ASA24 provided SAS macro that will calculate a Healthy Eating Index (HEI) score via a rubric (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) for each participant.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eINTAKE24 was initially considered as an alternative dietary assessment tool based on findings by Mackenzie et al.\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e suggesting higher user satisfaction. However, INTAKE24 required administrative approval with a turnaround time that conflicted with my study timeline. After waiting several days for an administrator answer with no resolution, I chose ASA24 due to its instant availability and validation in US populations. Before disseminating the Qualtrics QR code, I tested the integrated survey by filling it out myself to ensure clarity, flow, and technical functionality. The full survey took about 10\u0026ndash;20 minutes to complete, including both the questionnaire replies and the dietary recall portion. The survey was published on the morning of 3/20/25 and kept open for a week. Promotion of the survey involved flyering around popular spaces on campus, the r/UFL Reddit, and asking people exiting the pantry if they were interested in supporting pantry science via a survey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDemographics and Participant Characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 25 participants completed the survey, consisting of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students from the University of Florida. Among the respondents, 40% were first-generation students, and 24% were international students. The distribution across academic years was 20% freshmen, 24% sophomores, 28% juniors, 16% seniors, and 12% graduate/professional students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eFood Insecurity and Housing Instability\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFood insecurity was more prevalent among pantry users compared to non-users (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The following data is displayed as it was analyzed, with the survey option for \u0026ldquo;often true\u0026rdquo; as 3, \u0026ldquo;sometimes true\u0026rdquo; as 2, and \u0026ldquo;never true\u0026rdquo; as 1. Pantry users reported significantly higher levels of concern about exhausting their sources of food (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.75, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.68) compared to non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.21, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.43; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0149). Similarly, pantry users more frequently indicated that food purchased did not last (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.75, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.77) than non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.21, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.43; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0254). Additionally, skipping meals due to financial constraints was more common among pantry users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.81, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.83) compared to non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.21, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.43; p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0192).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding housing instability, pantry users indicated greater concern about losing housing (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.44, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.63) compared to non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.08, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.28), though this difference was borderline significant (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0518). Difficulty paying rent or mortgage was also more frequently reported by pantry users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.63, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.72) versus non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.14, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.53, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0451).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAcademic Impact\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePantry users reported a slightly higher negative impact on academic performance (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) due to food access issues (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.94, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.68) compared to non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.54, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.78), although this difference was not statistically significant (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.1587). The Likert scale applied to the statement \"I feel that my diet contributes to my academic success\" was strongly agreed to among pantry users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0), but the difference between groups was not statistically significant when compared to non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.43, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.98, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.1723).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePantry Accessibility and Satisfaction\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong pantry users, the ease of accessing the Field and Fork pantry was rated as follows: extremely easy (16%), somewhat easy (40%), neither easy nor difficult (32%), and somewhat difficult (12%). Satisfaction with the variety of food options varied, with responses indicating extreme satisfaction (12%), somewhat satisfied (40%), neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (36%), and somewhat dissatisfied (12%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePantry users commonly experienced difficulties such as limited hours, distance/transportation issues, stigma, limited food selection, and long wait times. Open-text responses noted specific logistical issues, such as \"low protein stock\" and \"2\u0026ndash;3 hour waits on the days after heavy restocks.\" Some participants cited cultural differences and food limitations as impediments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNon-pantry users also had the opportunity to share why they had not utilized the pantry. The most common reason was a lack of perceived need for the pantry (40%). Some participants were entirely unaware of the pantry\u0026rsquo;s existence (24%), while others felt that it was inaccessible to them (20%). A few respondents noted it was primarily stigma or embarrassment associated with not using the pantry (8%). Interestingly, when asked if they would consider using the pantry in the future, a significant portion of non-users (48%) indicated that they would.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDietary Intake and Healthy Eating Index (HEI)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOut of the initial survey respondents, only 15 participants completed the ASA24 dietary recall component. This discrepancy may have occurred because some participants opened the ASA24 tab but did not complete it immediately, leading to username conflicts when another participant claimed and logged in with the same credentials later. Additionally, some participants may have accidentally or intentionally skipped the dietary recall portion due to the only thing blocking their progress within the survey being to select the button that they had completed the ASA24.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo address potential biases and variability in the small sample size, I performed bootstrapping on the HEI data using R in Posit Cloud. Bootstrapping is a resampling technique that helps estimate the distribution of a statistic by sampling with replacement from the original data set. This method was chosen to provide a more robust estimate of dietary intake and ensure that the results remained reliable despite the limited sample size.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe bootstrapped analysis (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) revealed that pantry users had a slightly higher average HEI total score (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.44, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19.58) compared to non-users (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;45.63, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.99), although this difference was almost statistically random (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.8886).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eQualitative Feedback\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral participants mentioned long wait times as a significant barrier, being reported by six participants. Four respondents mentioned issues with transportation. Some participants pointed out that available food items did not match their cultural preferences or dietary restrictions: \"Few foods match my home cuisine\" and \"Limited Halal options.\u0026rdquo;. Five participants noted limited hours of operation: \u0026ldquo;During the times I am able to go, there is almost always nothing left on the shelves.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e Although quantitative results indicated fairly positive satisfaction levels for groups regarding food variety, qualitative responses contained common themes: \"Low stock of protein\" and \"Limited food variety\" were mentioned by four and three participants, respectively. Participants recommended extending pantry hours and ensuring stock remains consistent throughout the week: \"Implement a point system for checking out to allow more frequent visits with a cumulative limit,\" was suggested as a potential improvement for the service. Another suggestion was that when unable to maintain consistent stocking, to share possible limited supply notifications on the pantry social media page via story or post.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRelationship Between First-Generation and International Student Status with Survey Data\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst-generation students reported higher levels of food insecurity compared to their peers, with a mean concern about food running out (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.90, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.70) compared to non-first-generation students (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.34, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.48); skipping meals due to lack of affordability was also higher (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.00, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.71) compared to non-first-generation students (Mean\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.41, SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.50). International students also reported unique barriers related to cultural food preferences, with comments such as \"Few foods match my home cuisine\" and \"Limited Kosher/Halal options,\" reflecting the challenges of finding culturally appropriate foods. When comparing HEI scores among these groups, first-generation students had an average HEI score of 50.12 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16.84); Non-first-generation students had an average HEI score of 45.78 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15); International students had an average HEI score of 46.24 (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;17)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eImpact on Vulnerable Student Populations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study show that food insecurity disproportionately affects non-traditional students, such as first-generation and international students. First-generation students reported a significantly higher prevalence of concern about depleting their access to food and more frequent skipping of meals due to financial constraints. They also reported a higher impact of their diet on their academics. International students were shown to have lower HEI and higher housing instability, further compounding the biopsychosocial dimensions behind nutritional challenges. These findings emphasize how these groups exhibit a need for targeted supported strategies and require fundamental resources to succeed academically and maintain their overall well-being.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEvaluation of Pantry Effectiveness\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Field and Fork Campus Food Pantry demonstrated success in alleviating food insecurity among its students by providing access to fresh produce and other nutritious food at a level about equivalent to students who do not utilize the pantry and/or experience limited food insecurity. It is worth noting that pantry users had higher total vegetable intake compared to non-users; this can possibly be attributed to both access to frozen vegetables and the contribution of the UF/IFAS Field and Fork Farm and Gardens for supplying fresh produce. The integration of these structures likely caused the enhanced nutritional quality of diet in our sample.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral barriers to pantry access and use were identified that could limit the pantry\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness. These include long wait times, limited hours, transportation challenges, and inconsistent stock. These barriers could exacerbate the stress/cognitive load experienced by students experiencing food insecurity and, therefore, could negate some of the positive impacts of proper nutrition. Additionally, the stigma associated with pantry use and a general lack of awareness of the pantry on campus further hinders its utilization by those who might benefit most from it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDiet and HEI\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite minor differences in the HEI sub-scores between pantry users and non-pantry users, none of these differences were statistically significant. Pantry users had a slightly higher average HEI score than non-users, but this difference was almost statistically random. There may be some dietary benefits to the pantry as the pantry users had a higher HEI vegetable sub-score with borderline significance (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0632). However, pantry users also had lower total fruit intake than non-users; this could be due to a multitude of factors such as limited availability, variety of fruits not aligning with preference, or other food items being perceived as more filling or convenient.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eQualitative Feedback\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eLong wait periods, limited hours, transportation concerns, and cultural differences between accessible food items were all common themes. Participants suggested expanding pantry hours, more accurate stock management, and creating a point system for more frequent visits with a cumulative limit. Furthermore, some participants suggested using social media to alert students of low supplies or resupply timelines, especially before academic breaks, during which the pantry remains closed. These observations are consistent with prior research emphasizing the need for comprehensive and culturally aware food assistance programs\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRecommendations for Improvement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eI intend to synthesize a few recommendations based on participant feedback to enhance the effectiveness of the Field and Fork Campus Food Pantry and better support students experiencing food insecurity. These recommendations are clearly limited by budget, volunteer/staff labor, and institutional support; however, they could actively enhance the performance of not only students but the University of Florida\u0026rsquo;s campus community as a whole.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirstly, ensuring consistent stock throughout the week would address most of the concerns brought up by pantry users. One of the most coherent ideas is the implementation of a point system for checking out that would allow for more frequent visits, likely at varying times throughout the week, to avoid overwhelming the pantry\u0026rsquo;s resources or space\u0026mdash;therefore also reducing wait times. Examples of this system are sparse, but one that seemed especially intuitive was the San Joaquin Delta College Student Food Pantry Point System\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. I reached out to their campus pantry via e-mail and learned that the system began by allotting students 100 points at the beginning of a semester, with a maximum use of 16 points per week (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). 1 point for individually wrapped items (granola bars, instant ramen, mac \u0026amp; cheese), 2 for complete meals (salads, frozen meals, soups), 3 points for multiple meal items (milk, bread, cheese, rice, pasta), and 8 points for clothing, hygiene products, and school products. However, it is worth noting that their policies have since been updated due to significant increases in pantry usage each semester on their campus (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). 8 point items are no longer offered at the pantry and can instead be found at other campus resource centers, which has made room for expanded food inventory and variety. Additionally, this increased demand led to a once-a-week limit on pantry users and a restriction on duplicate items to avoid quickly running out of essential groceries. There is an exception/bonus for those who bring in reusable bags, as they receive an additional 2 points that they can apply to either a duplicate 2 point item, or 2 duplicate 1 point items. Although somewhat arbitrary in theory, this could serve as a solid foundation for adapting a point system that would materially benefit the UF pantry. An alternative would largely be to significantly boost the budget and capacity to store foodstuff in order to consistently meet campus demand in an unaltered manner.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondly, improving communication through social media or listserv updates about restocking schedules/available supplies could help relieve some of the uncertainty surrounding the pantry and help pantry users effectively plan their visits. This outreach can be paired with integrating nutritional education and support into food assistance to address both acute nutritional needs and long-term academic/psychosocial outcomes. As a result, students can develop healthy eating habits and manage stress more effectively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDrawing from Morrow et al.\u0026rsquo;s study\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e on \u0026ldquo;optimizing food pantry stocking through client preferences,\u0026rdquo; it could also be beneficial to align offerings with the preferences of those who use the pantry. By analyzing and understanding food preferences and categorizing food items accordingly, the pantry can optimize its stocking to meet the needs of the people who use it while minimizing food waste. This approach is likely internalized to a degree by volunteers and staff; however, a more standardized approach, such as that followed in the study, could be useful to further improve offerings, including the previously mentioned culturally or religiously relevant foods. This approach could not only improve operational efficiency but also enhance general satisfaction. However, it is worth noting that many shelves are stocked via donation only, so there would likely need to be supplemental donations or added/altered budget to take these preferences into account.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy Limitations and Future Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDue to the relatively small sample size and potential biases/misunderstandings in self-reported data, the generalizability of these results to other campuses is extremely limited and moderately limited on the UF campus. Furthermore, because the ASA24 is a 24-hour dietary recall, the nutrition found among the sample could be unusual, impacted by my promotion methods, simply inputted falsely to quicken the completion of the survey upon the annoyance of its length, etc. While bootstrapping provided reliable estimates, larger sample sizes for longer times would significantly enhance the validity and generalizability of the findings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFuture research should explore the long-term impacts of food pantry usage on dietary quality, academic outcomes, and the effectiveness of intervention strategies in addressing food insecurity among diverse student populations. Additionally, qualitative studies that further delve into the experiences of students experiencing food insecurity could uncover more nuanced barriers and facilitators. Lastly, research on the impacts of economic and state policies on vulnerable populations, especially in the completion of a college program, could inform future policymaking and address some of the fundamental issues behind food insecurity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eDeclarations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval and Consent to Participate\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003e This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and received ethical approval from the University of Florida Institutional Review Board (IRB) (approval number: [insert IRB number if available]). All participants provided written informed consent before participating in the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeclaration\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBruening M, Argo K, Payne-Sturges D, Laska MN (2017) The Struggle Is Real: A Systematic Review of Food Insecurity on Postsecondary Education Campuses. J Acad Nutr Diet 117(11):1767\u0026ndash;1791. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jand.2017.05.022\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jand.2017.05.022\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEl Zein A, Shelnutt KP, Colby S et al (2019) Prevalence and correlates of food insecurity among U.S. college students: a multi-institutional study. BMC Public Health. ;19(1):660. Published 2019 May 29. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1186/s12889-019-6943-6\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12889-019-6943-6\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChodur G, Singh S, Riordan EE, Kalaydjian S, Martinez SM (2024) J Acad Nutr Diet 124(2):225\u0026ndash;232e1. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jand.2023.09.009\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jand.2023.09.009\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Campus Food Pantry Use May Improve Daily Frequency of Fruit and Vegetable Intake Among California University Students Experiencing Food Insecurity\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarter MC, Albar SA, Morris MA et al (2015) Development of a UK Online 24-h Dietary Assessment Tool: myfood24. Nutrients 7(6):4016\u0026ndash;4032 Published 2015 May 27. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/nu7064016\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/nu7064016\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoldrick-Rab S, Richardson J, Schneider J, Hernandez A, Cady C (2018) Hungry and Homeless in College: results from a national study of basic needs insecurity in higher education. Wis HOPE Lab\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMackenzie KM, Kerr DA, Whitton C, Talati Z, McCaffrey TA, Mullan BA (2022) Predicting Perceived Problems in Self-Administered 24-Hour Dietary Recalls: A Quantitative Think-Aloud Study Comparing Automated Self-Assisted 24-Hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24\u0026reg;) and INTAKE24\u0026copy; in University Students. Nutrients 14(20):4281. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/nu14204281\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/nu14204281\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWolfson JA, Insolera N, Cohen A, Leung CW (2022) The effect of food insecurity during college on graduation and type of degree attained: evidence from a nationally representative longitudinal survey. Public Health Nutr 25(2):389\u0026ndash;397. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1017/S1368980021003104\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S1368980021003104\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWolfson JA, Garcia T, Leung CW (2021) Food Insecurity Is Associated with Depression, Anxiety, and Stress: Evidence from the Early Days of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States. Health Equity 5(1):64\u0026ndash;71 Published 2021 Feb 25. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1089/heq.2020.0059\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1089/heq.2020.0059\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIdehai OV, Mbaya P, Chung T, Bhurosy T (2024) A systematic review of factors associated with student use of campus food pantries: implications for addressing barriers and facilitating use. BMC Public Health 24(1):97. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1186/s12889-023-17583-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12889-023-17583-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSubar AF, Kirkpatrick SI, Mittl B et al (2012) The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour dietary recall (ASA24): a resource for researchers, clinicians, and educators from the National Cancer Institute. J Acad Nutr Diet 112(8):1134\u0026ndash;1137. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jand.2012.04.016\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jand.2012.04.016\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHow it happened: Alan and Cathy Hitchcock Field \u0026amp; Fork Pantry. UF/IFAS Giving. October 2 (2023) Accessed July 1, 2024. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://blogs.ifas.ufl.edu/give/2023/10/02/how-it-happened-alan-and-cathy-hitchcock-field-fork-pantry/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://blogs.ifas.ufl.edu/give/2023/10/02/how-it-happened-alan-and-cathy-hitchcock-field-fork-pantry/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSan Joaquin Delta College (2025) Student Food Pantry Point System [flier]. San Joaquin Delta College, Stockton, CA\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMorrow BF, Davis LB, Jiang S, McCormick N (2024) Optimizing food pantry stocking through client preferences: a novel elicitation and classification process. J Humanitarian Logistics Supply Chain Manage 14(4):399\u0026ndash;418\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"University of Florida","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Food insecurity, Campus food pantry, ASA24, Healthy Eating Index, Dietary intake assessment","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v2","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v2","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eFood insecurity among college students has a significant impact on academic institutions as rates of food insecurity among students are consistently and substantially higher than the general U.S. population. This study investigates the relationship between dietary intake and food insecurity risk factors among University of Florida students who use the campus food pantry compared to those who do not. A mixed-methods approach was performed, including semi-structured interviews and surveys incorporating the Automated Self-Administered 24-hour Dietary Assessment Tool (ASA24).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePantry users were found to have experienced higher levels of food insecurity and housing instability than their non-user peers. They also reported a greater impact on their academic performance in relation to diet. Qualitative feedback highlighted logistical barriers such as long wait times, limited hours, and inconsistent stock. The dietary analysis found minor differences in the Healthy Eating Index (HEI) scores between groups, with pantry users showing slightly higher vegetable intake bordering on significance, possibly due to produce supplied by the UF/IFAS Field \u0026amp; Fork Farm and Gardens and the process of cooking for oneself. However, these differences were not statistically significant. Suggestions collected by participants include extending hours, ensuring consistent stock, implementing a point system for more frequent visits, and improving communication about restocking schedules. Additionally, communicating with pantry users on their preferences for stock could enhance satisfaction and reduce food waste. Future research should explore the long-term impacts of food pantry usage on dietary quality and the experiences of students experiencing food insecurity to uncover further nuance.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Comparative Analysis of Dietary Intake Among University of Florida Students: Food Pantry Users vs. Non-Users","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":2,"date":"2025-07-03 17:58:25","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v2","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}},{"code":1,"date":"2025-06-13 09:07:31","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6848504/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"cd0dbeb1-0ecf-4367-94f7-ddb10da29fb6","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 3rd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":49999033,"name":"Food Science \u0026 Technology"},{"id":49999034,"name":"Nutrition \u0026 Dietetics"},{"id":49999035,"name":"Health Economics \u0026 Outcomes Research"},{"id":49999036,"name":"Sociology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-13T09:07:32+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-03 17:58:25","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v2","identity":"rs-6848504","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6848504","identity":"rs-6848504","version":["v2"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}