ArticlePloS one2022
Efficacy of sanitization protocols in removing parasites in vegetables: A protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of sanitization protocols in removing or reducing parasites from vegetables: A systematic review with meta-analysis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Investigating the Occurrence of Soil-Transmitted Parasites Contaminating Soil, Vegetables, and Green Fodder in the East of Nile Delta, Egypt.Journal of parasitology research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParasitic contamination of vegetables is a public health problem in several countries and a challenge for food safety. With a short path from the field to the table, these foods can suffer several flaws in the good practices of production, transport and packaging which culminate in an offer of contaminated food to consumers. Therefore, this study describes a systematic review protocol with meta-analysis on evaluating the effectiveness of existing sanitation methods in removing parasites from vegetables.
methodsThe study will be conducted from published studies that report analyzes of parasites in vegetables before and after sanitization processes. The MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, FSTA, LILACS, Scopus and AGRIS electronic databases will be used. In addition, manual searches will be carried out through related articles, references to included articles and directories of theses and dissertations. The primary outcome will be the reduction or absence of parasitic forms in vegetables after the intervention or combined interventions, and the secondary outcomes will include: identification of the main parasites, assessment of the time required for processing and cost-effectiveness analysis. Two authors will independently screen the studies and extract data. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion, and a third reviewer will decide if there is no consensus. The criteria established by the Cochrane Manual (with some adaptations) will be used to assess the risk of bias in the studies and if the results are considered acceptable and sufficiently homogeneous, and a meta-analysis will be performed to synthesize the findings. DISCUSSION: The systematic review produced from this protocol will provide evidence on the effectiveness of sanitation protocols for removing parasitic forms in vegetables and will contribute to strengthening food safety, with the adoption of best sanitation practices and prevention of health risks. In addition, the study may highlight possible knowledge gaps that need to be filled with new research. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020206929.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.