Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32874212›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2020

Scientific Opinion on the update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA (2017-2019).

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ), Kostas Koutsoumanis, Ana Allende, Avelino Alvarez-Ordóñez, Declan Bolton, Sara Bover-Cid, Marianne Chemaly, Robert Davies, Alessandra De Cesare, Friederike Hilbert and 17 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 221 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
221citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

221 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Eight Weeks ofNutrients · 2023
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Nutrition Literacy, Hydration Awareness and Food Label Use in School Populations: A Cross-Sectional Study of Students and Teachers Across European Contexts.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Article
  8. Functional Genome Annotation ofJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Robust Goat-DerivedVeterinary sciences · 2026
    Article
  12. Probiotic Development Strategy Centered on Stability and Regulatory Considerations.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Application ofFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  16. Food science & nutrition · 2025
    Article
  17. Strain-Specific Safety Evaluation ofFood science & nutrition · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

161 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

27 authors.

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)
Kostas Koutsoumanis
Ana Allende
Avelino Alvarez-Ordóñez
Declan Bolton
Sara Bover-Cid
Marianne Chemaly
Robert Davies
Alessandra De Cesare
Friederike Hilbert
Roland Lindqvist
Maarten Nauta
Luisa Peixe
Giuseppe Ru
Marion Simmons
Panagiotis Skandamis
Elisabetta Suffredini
Pier Sandro Cocconcelli
Pablo Salvador Fernández Escámez
Miguel Prieto Maradona
Amparo Querol
Juan Evaristo Suarez
Ingvar Sundh
Just Vlak
Fulvio Barizzone
Sandra Correia
Lieve Herman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) was developed to provide a safety pre-assessment within EFSA for microorganisms. Strains belonging to QPS taxonomic units (TUs) still require an assessment based on a specific data package, but QPS status facilitates fast track evaluation. QPS TUs are unambiguously defined biological agents assessed for the body of knowledge, their safety and their end use. Safety concerns are, where possible, to be confirmed at strain or product level, and reflected as 'qualifications'. Qualifications need to be evaluated at strain level by the respective EFSA units. The lowest QPS TU is the species level for bacteria, yeasts and protists/algae, and the family for viruses. The QPS concept is also applicable to genetically modified microorganisms used for production purposes if the recipient strain qualifies for the QPS status, and if the genetic modification does not indicate a concern. Based on the actual body of knowledge and/or an ambiguous taxonomic position, the following TUs were excluded from the QPS assessment: filamentous fungi, oomycetes, streptomycetes

Indexed as

algaebacteriafood and feedfungiQPSsafetyvirusyeast

Identifiers

PMID32874212
PMCPMC7448045

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-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.