Consumer knowledge and practice pertaining to safe food-handling in households
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Foodborne illness is the largest class of emerging infectious diseases in Canada. Health Canada estimates that every year in Canada there are 2.2 million cases of foodborne illnesses and 31 of these people die. Most of these cases are preventable. Health Canada estimates that the annual costs related to these illnesses and deaths exceed $2 billion due to medical and hospital expenses, lost income, time off work and loss of business to the food processor or retailer. In 2- 3% of cases, foodborne illnesses can lead to chronic health problems. Illnesses such as chronic arthritis and hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), leading to kidney failure, have long-term consequences for the individuals affected and for society and the economy as a whole. This study was conducted to, a) determine the knowledge residents of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) have regarding preventative measures and causes of foodborne illness and, b) establish the practices of the target population in two important areas in the prevention of foodborne illness in the home: cross-contamination between raw meat and other foods, and cooking foods sufficiently to eliminate pathogens. A self-administered mail questionnaire was the contact method of choice. Municipalities of Greater Vancouver were stratified into three strata to ensure that the diverse population of the GVRD would be represented in the target population with regards to socio-ethnic variables. The survey was conducted between May 19th and June 30th 1998. Of the 1,600 households contacted, 582 returned a valid questionnaire. A large segment of the persons who are primarily responsible for household meal preparation in the Greater Vancouver Regional District, specifically young adults under the age of 35 and males, reported using inappropriate hygiene practices during meal preparation to prevent foodborne illness. This segment of the population reported using incorrect methods to determine whether meat was cooked sufficiently to prevent foodborne illness and preparation practices that lead to cross-contamination between kitchen utensils and ready-to-eat foods. Furthermore, this population indicated they had incorrect knowledge of the causes and symptoms of foodborne illness. Use of simple techniques before, during and after food preparation will significantly reduce the risk of foodborne illness. Education of the general public, and in particular young adults and females, is important and suggested educational approaches include food labelling, the media, health professionals, primary school curriculum, and offering of training courses in the community. However, further research is needed to determine the most effective way to educate the public to improve food safety knowledge and practices.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».