Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35407145›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in Food Safety Risk Management: The Case of Dioxins in Baltic Fish.

Beshir M Ali, M G Andersson, B H P van den Borne, M Focker, H J van der Fels-Klerx

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Designing Optimal Aflatoxin Monitoring Schemes in the Dairy Supply Chain.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Foraging, Farming or Shopping? A Decision Matrix Approach for Food Environment Assessments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Guidance on risk-benefit assessment of foods.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024
    Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Beshir M AliBusiness Economics Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5865-8468
M G AnderssonSection for Environment and Feed Hygiene, Department for Chemistry, Environment and Feed Hygiene, National Veterinary Institute (SVA), 75189 Uppsala, Sweden.
B H P van den BorneBusiness Economics Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6248-4707
M FockerBusiness Economics Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8483-0551
H J van der Fels-KlerxBusiness Economics Group, Wageningen University & Research, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7801-394X
Wageningen University & Research · NLSwedish Veterinary Agency · SE

Funding

European Food Safety Authority GA/EFSA/AFSCO/2017/01-GA05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Swedish risk management case of Baltic fatty fishes, in which dioxin levels may be too high, is a typical multidimensional food safety decision problem involving public health, economic, environmental and socio-cultural aspects. To effectively address the dioxin food safety problem, the multiple dimensions and conflicting interests of stakeholders have to be considered systematically when evaluating competing risk management options. The objectives of this study were to illustrate the applicability of the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) method for multidimensional food safety risk management problems, and to evaluate the Swedish dioxin risk management using MCDA. The results show that the MCDA method is indeed a relevant tool for modelling the multifactorial Swedish dioxin problem and for initiating discussions amongst stakeholders to increase the acceptance of chosen strategies. Abolishing the derogation from the European Commission's maximum limits for the presence of dioxins in Swedish fish is the dominant strategy for risk assessors, whereas the preferences provided by the other stakeholders would suggest a continuation of the derogation without providing consumer information. However, the preferences of female consumers match with the 2011 decision of the Swedish government to ask for a derogation in combination with consumer information. The conclusion drawn from our MCDA analysis is comparable to the government's decision that-given the gradual reduction in dioxin concentrations in Baltic fish-the decision to continue providing consumer information or not mainly depends on how risk managers balance the preferences of the different stakeholders.

Indexed as

chemicalcontaminationdecision makingderogationMCDAtrade-offs

Identifiers

PMID35407145
PMCPMC8997548
OpenAlexW4223532705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.