Cited by 37Food Safety and HygieneSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyListeria monocytogenes in Food Safety

Preventing and Controlling Foodborne Disease in Commercial and Institutional Food Service Settings: A Systematic Review of Published Intervention Studies

Open access
Viator, Catherine, Blitstein, Jonathan, Brophy, Jenna E., Fraser, Angela·2015·Journal of Food Protection

Abstract

This study reviews the current literature on behavioral and environmental food safety interventions conducted in commercial and institutional food service settings. A systematic search of the published literature yielded 268 candidate articles, from which a set of 23 articles reporting intervention outcomes was retained for evaluation. A categorization of measured outcomes is reported; studies addressed multiple outcomes ranging from knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of personal hygiene and food safety to management practices and disease rates and outbreaks. This study also investigates the quality of reported research methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions, using a nine-point quality index adapted by the authors. The observed scores suggest that there are opportunities to improve the design and reporting of research in the field of foodborne disease prevention as it applies to food safety interventions that target the food service industry. The aim is to aid researchers in this area to design higher quality studies and to produce clearer and more useful reports of their research. In turn, this can help to create a more complete evidence base that can be used to continually improve interventions in this domain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-14-266

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Viator, C., Blitstein, J., Brophy, J. E., & Fraser, A.
Affiliations
  • RTI International (US)
  • Clemson University (US)
Corresponding author
Viator, Catherine
Venue
Journal of Food Protection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
78
Issue
2
Pages
446-456
ISSN
0362-028X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2326335266
Cited by
37
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Food Protection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (2011-68003-30395)
  • Clemson University
  • RTI International
  • National Institute of Food and Agriculture (2011‐68003‐30395)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Listeria monocytogenes in Food Safety
Keywords
foodborne illness prevention, food safety interventions, institutional food service, food service industry, personal hygiene, foodborne outbreak, intervention effectiveness
MeSH terms
Food Handling, Foodborne Diseases, Food Services, Humans, Publishing

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