MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201347042 · doi:10.3390/foods10102241

SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic and Food Safety Oversight: Implications in Canada and Coping Strategies

2021· review· en· W3201347042 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvain Charlebois, Janet Music

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Environmental Waste Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakCoping (psychology)Environmental healthFood safetyBusinessMedicineVirologyOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Psychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has created enormous societal disruptions in the Western world, including Canada, with serious implications for food safety. Since the start of the pandemic, many scholars have investigated the issue of food safety through different lenses. In this review, two research thrusts were identified, the epidemiology of the virus and food safety oversight. Both were challenged by the pandemic in Canada and elsewhere. In this paper, we first present how Canada experienced the pandemic. We then present how epidemiology and food safety oversight were affected by the virus and how the spread exposed gaps in Canada's food safety system. We explain how Canada was not adequately prepared to face the food safety challenges posed by SARS-CoV-2. The review ends with an explanation on how risk perceptions will be altered by the pandemic in Canada and how food safety systems will adjust to better anticipate systemic risks in the future.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoodsSame topicHealthcare and Environmental Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207