MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3155176789 · doi:10.47339/ephj.2020.27

In an attempt at saving the environment, are you instead harming yourself?

2020· article· en· W3155176789 sur OpenAlex
Ravneet Athwal, Environmental Health BCIT School of Health Sciences, Helen Heacock

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.
venuePublié dans une revue dont le pays d'attache est le Canada.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueBCIT Environmental Public Health Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Mots-clésPlastic bagSanitationBusinessFood preparationSurvey researchAdvertisingEnvironmental healthFood safetyEngineeringMedicineWaste managementEnvironmental engineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background With the increasing shift to reusable shopping bags and the potential ban on plastic bags in Canada in the near future, the question arises as to whether consumers are aware of the proper practices to maintain a safe environment within the bags themselves. The reason for this study was to determine if people are aware of the need to keep specific bags for certain food groups and if they are aware of the need to wash and/or sanitize their reusable shopping bags due to the risk of cross-contamination. Usage of the same bag for various foods (e.g. lettuce and raw meat) without proper sanitation practices can lead to cross-contamination between the foods, and in turn, create a risk of food borne illness. Methods A survey created on Microsoft Office 365 Word was administered through Survey Monkey and distributed on Reddit, various social media, and by email. The survey collection ran for one week in the month of January 2020. The survey consisted of 14 questions and took approximately two to three minutes to complete. Results 225 respondents filled out the online survey. The majority of survey responses were from British Columbia (47%), were female (54%), attended post-secondary institutions (65%) and were between the ages of 20 to 30 (46%). Nearly half of reusable shopping bag users use the same bag to store their fruits/vegetables and their meats, 61% of users have never cleaned their shopping bags, 7% clean them weekly, and only 1% clean their bag after every use. Those who mix produce and meats in the same bag are less likely to wash their RSBs (p = 0.0006). Males are less likely to wash their shopping bags than females (P = 0.009). 97% of survey respondents were not provided with any cleaning instructions upon their purchase of a reusable shopping bag and 93% have never seen educational material presented on RSB cleaning and/or the risk of cross-contamination. 84% believe there is not appropriate awareness and knowledge among the general public on the cleaning requirements of reusable shopping bags and the potential risk of cross-contamination while 10% believe there is sufficient awareness. Not surprisingly, those who were not aware that shopping bags need to be cleaned between uses were less likely to wash them (p = 7.804 x10-19). Conclusion In conclusion: 1. people who are not aware that their RSBs need to be cleaned between uses are also less likely to clean them, 2. males are less likely to clean their reusable shopping bags, 3. bags that contain both fruits/vegetables and meats in the same bags are also less likely to be cleaned, and 4. bags that are used more frequently also cleaned more frequently. Further education on reusable shopping bags is needed along with the transition from plastic bags to reusable shopping bags. At the time of publication, the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic was rapidly spreading throughout the world. In order to prevent fomite spread of disease, British Columbia forbade the use of RSBs in grocery stores, resulting in a proliferation of plastic bags. Time will tell when, and if, RSBs will be permitted for grocery shopping.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,444
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,070
Tête enseignante GPT0,257
Écart entre enseignants0,187 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle