MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411924164 · doi:10.1016/j.soh.2025.100116

Milk and meat safety in Nepal: addressing challenges and exploring solutions

2025· review· en· W4411924164 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Subedi, Sameer Thakur, Anil Gautam, Madhav Paudel, Sumit Jyoti, Milan Kandel, Ananda Tiwari

Bibliographic record

VenueScience in One Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Safety and Hygiene
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood safetyBusinessFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transmission of zoonotic diseases through animal-derived food products poses a significant global public health challenge, with contaminated milk and meat serving as major transmission pathways. In Nepal, the growing consumption of these products has amplified the risk of foodborne illnesses, largely due to widespread bacterial contamination. This review systematically explores the prevalence, distribution, and public health significance of key bacterial pathogens- including Salmonella, Escherichia coli , Shigella , Staphylococcus aureus , Brucella , Bacillus cereus , Mycobacterium tuberculosis , and Campylobacter in Nepalese milk and meat products. The analysis identifies major contributing factors: inadequate hygiene and sanitation practices, weak regulatory frameworks, insufficient infrastructure, excessive antibiotic usage, and limited public awareness. The high levels of bacterial contamination, coupled with the emergence of antibiotic-resistant strains, underscore the urgency for strategic interventions. Recommended measures include strict enforcement of hygiene and sanitation standards, strengthening regulatory policies, enhancing infrastructure, comprehensive public education campaigns, and prudent antibiotic stewardship. Implementation of these strategies is imperative to improve food safety, protect public health, and mitigate the risks posed by bacterial zoonotic diseases in Nepal.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.763

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.467
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.085 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience in One HealthSame topicFood Safety and HygieneFrench-language works237,207