Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 421

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scientific Opinion on Campylobacter in broiler meat production: control options and performance objectives and/or targets at different stages of the food chain: Campylobacter in broiler meat

Open access
EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)·2011·EFSA Journal

Abstract

Abstract It is estimated that there are approximately nine million cases of human campylobacteriosis per year in the EU27. The disease burden of campylobacteriosis and its sequelae is 0.35 million disability‐adjusted life years (DALYs) per year and total annual costs are 2.4 billion €. Broiler meat may account for 20% to 30% of these, while 50% to 80% may be attributed to the chicken reservoir as a whole (broilers as well as laying hens). The public health benefits of controlling Campylobacter in primary broiler production are expected to be greater than control later in the chain as the bacteria may also spread from farms to humans by other pathways than broiler meat. Strict implementation of biosecurity in primary production and GMP/HACCP during slaughter may reduce colonization of broilers with Campylobacter, and contamination of carcasses. The effects cannot be quantified because they depend on many interrelated local factors. In addition, the use of fly screens, restriction of slaughter age, or discontinued thinning may further reduce consumer risks but have not yet been tested widely. After slaughter, a 100% risk reduction can be reached by irradiation or cooking of broiler meat on an industrial scale. More than 90% risk reduction can be obtained by freezing carcasses for 2–3 weeks. A 50–90% risk reduction can be achieved by freezing for 2–3 days, hot water or chemical carcass decontamination. Achieving a target of 25% or 5% BFP in all other MS is estimated to result in 50% and 90% reduction of public health risk, respectively. A public health risk reduction > 50% or > 90% could be achieved if all batches would comply with microbiological criteria with a critical limit of 1000 or 500 CFU/gram of neck and breast skin, respectively, while 15% and 45% of all tested batches would not comply with these criteria.

Overview

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 · 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2105

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 421

Metadata

Authors
(BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H.
Venue
EFSA Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-04
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
2105
ISSN
1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4211166583
Cited by
421
References
6
FWCI
34.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scientific Opinion on Campylobacter in broiler meat production: control options and performance objectives and/or targets at different stages of the food chain: Campylobacter in broiler meat. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2105
The paper
(BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H. (2011). Scientific Opinion on Campylobacter in broiler meat production: control options and performance objectives and/or targets at different stages of the food chain: Campylobacter in broiler meat. EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2105

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.