Cited by 62Food Safety and HygieneOccupational Health and Safety ResearchChemical Safety and Risk Management

A roadmap for developing educational actions using food safety culture assessment – A case of an institutional food service

Open access
Zanin, Laís Mariano, Luning, Pieternel A., Stedefeldt, Elke·2022·Food Research International

Abstract

Food safety (FS) culture has been recognised as a phenomenon that can shape food safety behaviour. Specific educational actions can improve food safety behaviour. This study aimed to build a roadmap to guide the development of educational actions based on the assessment of the prevailing FS-culture. The study was conducted in an institutional food service in the Brazilian air force. A previously-developed mixed-methods and data triangulation approach was used to assess the FS-culture based on eight elements (leadership, communication, knowledge, commitment, risk perception, work pressure and normative beliefs, work environment, and management systems, styles, and process). The roadmap was designed based on a combination of the FS-culture element score (1-reactive, 2-active, and 3-proactive) and priority levels (highest, moderate, lowest, and no priority) of proposed topics to be included in educational actions. Such topics were based on specific literature about food safety culture and the behaviour of food handlers. The FS-culture diagnosis in the air force food service demonstrated an "active to proactive" FS-culture; the element "work pressure and normative beliefs" showed the highest score (3 - proactive), whereas "risk perception" and "management systems, styles, and process" indicated the lowest scores (1-2 - reactive to active). Based on the weaknesses and strengths in the prevailing FS-culture, the roadmap revealed that the topics showing the lowest scores, "risk perception" and "management systems, styles, and process," had the highest priority to be included in the educational actions. The designed roadmap may support food services in making decisions about food safety education towards a proactive FS-culture.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodres.2022.111064

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Zanin, L. M., Luning, P. A., & Stedefeldt, E.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal de São Paulo (BR)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Stedefeldt, Elke
Venue
Food Research International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-05
Volume
155
Pages
111064
ISSN
0963-9969 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4213424087
Cited by
62
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
FWCI
4.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Food Research International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Occupational Health and Safety Research
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Chemical Health and Safety › Chemical Safety and Risk Management
Keywords
food safety culture, food safety education, institutional food service, food handlers, food safety behavior, risk perception, leadership, normative beliefs, occupational stress, management systems, Brazilian Air Force
MeSH terms
Food, Food Handling, Food Services, Humans, Safety Management, Food Safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review