MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143552754 · doi:10.3382/ps.2009-00213

The change in prevalence of Campylobacter on chicken carcasses during processing: A systematic review

2010· review· en· W2143552754 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsScaldingCampylobacterEvisceration (ophthalmology)Veterinary medicineBiologyMedicineFood sciencePathologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the change in prevalence of Campylobacter on chicken carcasses during processing. A structured literature search of 8 electronic databases using the key words for "Campylobacter," "chicken," and "processing" identified 1,734 unique citations. Abstracts were screened for relevance by 2 independent reviewers. Thirty-two studies described prevalence at more than one stage during processing and were included in this review. Of the studies that described the prevalence of Campylobacter on carcasses before and after specific stages of processing, the chilling stage had the greatest number of studies (9), followed by washing (6), defeathering (4), scalding (2), and evisceration (1). Studies that sampled before and after scalding or chilling, or both, showed that the prevalence of Campylobacter generally decreased immediately after the stage (scalding: 20.0 to 40.0% decrease; chilling: 100.0% decrease to 26.6% increase). The prevalence of Campylobacter increased after defeathering (10.0 to 72.0%) and evisceration (15.0%). The prevalence after washing was inconsistent among studies (23.0% decrease to 13.3% increase). Eleven studies reported the concentration of Campylobacter, as well as, or instead of, the prevalence. Studies that sampled before and after specific stages of processing showed that the concentration of Campylobacter decreased after scalding (minimum decrease of 1.3 cfu/g, maximum decrease of 2.9 cfu/mL), evisceration (0.3 cfu/g), washing (minimum 0.3 cfu/mL, maximum 1.1 cfu/mL), and chilling (minimum 0.2 cfu/g, maximum 1.7 cfu/carcass) and increased after defeathering (minimum 0.4 cfu/g, maximum 2.9 cfu/mL). Available evidence is sparse and suggests more data are needed to understand the magnitude and mechanism by which the prevalence and concentration of Campylobacter changes during processing. This understanding should help researchers and program developers identify the most likely points in processing to implement effective control efforts. For example, if contamination will occur during defeathering and likely during evisceration, critical control points postevisceration are likely to have a greater effect on the end product going to the consumer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it