Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31764911›Full record

ReviewTrends in food science & technology2019

Risk presented to minimally processed chilled foods by psychrotrophic

Martin D Webb, Gary C Barker, Kaarin E Goodburn, Michael W Peck

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in food science & technology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Germination and Growth of Two Strains ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Assessment of the risk associated withFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Growth Kinetics ofInternational journal of food science · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Genetic Profile and Toxigenic Potential ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Performance Testing ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Risk ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Martin D WebbQuadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UQ, UK.
Gary C BarkerQuadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UQ, UK.
Kaarin E GoodburnChilled Food Associates, c/o 3 Weekley Wood Close, Kettering, NN14 1UQ, UK.
Michael W PeckQuadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UQ, UK.
Quadram Institute · GBChilled Food Association · GBNorwich Research Park · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpores of psychrotrophic Bacillus cereus may survive the mild heat treatments given to minimally processed chilled foods. Subsequent germination and cell multiplication during refrigerated storage may lead to bacterial concentrations that are hazardous to health. SCOPE AND APPROACH: This review is concerned with the characterisation of factors that prevent psychrotrophic B. cereus reaching hazardous concentrations in minimally processed chilled foods and associated foodborne illness. A risk assessment framework is used to quantify the risk associated with B. cereus and minimally processed chilled foods. KEY FINDINGS AND

conclusionsBacillus cereus is responsible for two types of food poisoning, diarrhoeal (an infection) and emetic (an intoxication); however, no reported outbreaks of food poisoning have been associated with B. cereus and correctly stored commercially-produced minimally processed chilled foods. In the UK alone, more than 10

Indexed as

Bacillus cereusChilled foodFood poisoningPsychrotrophicRisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID31764911
PMCPMC6853023
OpenAlexW2972162813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.