MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400149240 · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2024.102836

Availability and Use of Methods To Limit Cross-Contamination of Gluten-Free Foods in Restaurants in a Large Urban Centre in Canada

2024· article· en· W4400149240 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danielle Defries, Caitlynn Danchuk, Jay C. Petkau, Heather Blewett

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Safety and Hygiene
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContaminationGluten freeLimit (mathematics)BusinessEnvironmental scienceFood scienceGlutenMathematicsChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Dining out has been reported as one of the largest perceived barriers to gluten-free (GF) diet adherence. The main objective of this study was to assess the availability and use of methods to limit cross-contamination (CC) of GF items in restaurants in Winnipeg, Manitoba, a major city within central Canada. Methods: Restaurants were identified through an online search and were categorized based on locality, service type, and ethnic cuisine. Restaurants were contacted by phone, asked if they served GF items and if methods were used to limit gluten CC. Chi-squared (X2) tests were used to test for differences in the proportion of restaurants reporting GF items and using methods to limit CC based on service type, locality, and ethnic cuisine type. Results with a p-value of < 0.05 were considered significant. Results: Of the 548 restaurants surveyed, 69% reported offering GF items. 73% of full-service restaurants (FSRs) reported offering GF items, while only 55% of quick-service restaurants (QSRs) reported the same [X2(1, N=548) =13.2, p< 0.001]. There was a significant relationship between restaurant locality and availability of GF menu items, with 41% of chain and 22% of local restaurants reporting offering GF items [X2(1, N=548) = 4.10, p= 0.04]. Availability of GF items was lowest in restaurants serving African cuisine (50% of African restaurants surveyed), and highest in restaurants serving Latin American cuisine (95% of Latin American restaurants surveyed). Overall, 81% of all restaurants offering GF options reported using methods to limit gluten CC. The percentage of restaurants who reported using such methods was higher for QSR (90%) vs. FSRs (79%) [X2(1, N=375) = 4.5, p=0.03)]. Use of these methods was reported by 89% of chain restaurants but only 72% of local restaurants, X2(1, N=375) = 4.86, p=0.03). Although the percentage of restaurants reporting the use of methods to limit CC was relatively high amongst all ethnic restaurants, some differences existed [X2(9, N=375) = 23.5, p=0.05]. Conclusions: Availability GF foods and use of procedures to limit gluten CC vary based on type of service, locality, and cuisine served. This information may be helpful for individuals following a GF diet when making decisions on dining out. Funding Sources: Salary support from The University of Winnipeg and Agriculture and Agri-foods Canada.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicFood Safety and HygieneFrench-language works237,207