MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962522321 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/x6mk7

Identifying climate mitigation and adaptation strategies for protection of preharvest food safety: A rapid review protocol

2024· other· en· W6962522321 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreharvestVulnerability (computing)Adaptation (eye)Climate changeFood securityFood safety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Climate change is predicted to impact the occurrence, range, and survival of biological and chemical contaminants of preharvest foods. Consequently, this projection can drive increases in food- and water-borne disease outbreaks globally. Climate-sensitive contaminants frequently occur at the preharvest stage, where foods experience higher environmental exposure and vulnerability to extreme weather events. Prevention and reduction of negative climate-related preharvest food safety risks can be facilitated through climate-specific mitigation and adaptation strategies, allowing agri-food industries globally to build climate resilience and support the production of safe foods. To our knowledge, no review has been executed to collect and synthesize global methods to mitigate and adapt to projected climate-vulnerable preharvest food safety risks. Objectives: The objective of this rapid review is to identify the extent and types of climate mitigation and adaptation strategies described in the literature and discuss how these strategies can protect preharvest foods from climate-sensitive food safety risks. Methods: Preliminary searches of CAB International (CABI), Web of Science, and Google were completed to develop a list of relevant search terms and CABI thesaurus index terms. The final list of search terms will be used to search two databases: CAB Abstracts and Web of Science. A grey literature search will also be conducted by searching Google, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and various relevant international and intergovernmental organizations. All retrieved articles will be uploaded and managed using Covidence. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts of all articles, followed by a full-text screening of the selected articles. Data from the articles that pass both levels of screening will be extracted using a data extraction form. Data will be synthesized and presented using graphical and tabular formats. Discussion: This rapid review protocol describes the developed review methods utilized to ensure the comprehensive retrieval of relevant sources that identify climate mitigation and adaptation strategies proposed or implemented to prevent biological and chemical contamination of preharvest foods. Publication retrieval occurs on a global scale in this rapid review protocol; however, the results will serve as a framework for decision-makers in Canadian agri-food and public health industries to protect relevant preharvest foods in Canada, as well as the health and safety of Canadians.

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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.131
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.131
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.011
Bibliometrics0.0230.015
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0070.007
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.016

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207