Cited by 22Celiac Disease Research and ManagementFood Safety and HygieneFood Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk of Cross-Contact for Gluten-Free Pizzas in Shared-Production Restaurants in Relation to Oven Cooking Procedures

Open access

Abstract

To allow celiac patients to have meals out, a growing number of restaurants and pizzas houses that simultaneously provide gluten-free (GF) pizzas and wheat-based (WB) pizzas have recently been opened in Italy. In these restaurants, GF pizzas are prepared with GF raw materials, following procedures that minimize the risk of gluten cross-contact. Here, we evaluate the risk of gluten cross-contact of GF pizzas in relation to the preparation procedures, thus aiming at identifying a safe procedure for cooking GF pizzas. Our results show that, when specific requirements are complied with, the simultaneous cooking of GF and WB pizzas is a procedure as safe as having an oven dedicated to GF pizzas or the alternate cooking of GF and WB pizzas in the same oven.

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 · 10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-15-538

Cites

9 of 9 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

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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 9 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 22

Metadata

Authors
Vincentini, O., Izzo, M., Maialetti, F., Gonnelli, E., Neuhold, S., & Silano, M.
Affiliations
Istituto Superiore di Sanità (IT)
Corresponding author
Silano, Marco
Venue
Journal of Food Protection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-09
Volume
79
Issue
9
Pages
1642-1646
ISSN
0362-028X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2508966122
Cited by
22
References
9
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Food Protection (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Innovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Celiac Disease Research and Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Immunology and Allergy › Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Research
Keywords
celiac disease, food safety
MeSH terms
Cooking, Glutens, Humans, Italy, Restaurants, Diet, Gluten-Free

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