ArticleHeliyon2024
Simulated use of thresholds for precautionary allergen labeling: Impact on prevalence and risk.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Traditional and Emerging Physical Processing Technologies: Applications and Challenges in Allergen Control of Animal and Plant Proteins.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heterogeneity and overuse of precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) in prepackaged foods have eroded its risk communication efficacy. Experts recommend applying PAL based on allergen concentration thresholds, but adoption remains limited. The aim of this study was to quantitatively assess the potential impact of this approach using Monte Carlo risk simulations. Four allergens and 9 food categories were considered in 2 scenarios: (1) consumption of products currently carrying PAL in Canada where individuals with food allergy (FA) are assumed to consume them, and (2) consumption of products without PAL, in a hypothetical context where PAL is applied based on thresholds that would protect 99 % (ED01) and 95 % (ED05) of individuals with FA, and individuals with FA systematically avoid products with PAL. In scenario (1), although several cases studied would cause <10 reactions/10 000 eating occasions (e.o.), there were also many that would cause >20 reactions/10 000 e.o. Cross-contact milk posed the highest risk (max. 1120 reactions/10 000 e.o.), and peanut, the least (max. 10 reactions/10 000 e.o.). In scenario (2), consumption of products without PAL, when using thresholds for PAL based on ED01, could lead to a maximum of 15 reactions/10 000 e. o. for all studied cases, and based on ED05, to 57 (if excluding dark chocolate with milk PAL). In most cases, the estimated number of reactions per 10 000 e.o. attributed to products with PAL currently on the market would be higher (p < 0.05) than that attributed to products without PAL, if PAL is applied based on the simulated thresholds. Thus, a threshold driven approach to adopt PAL on prepackaged foods, while advising consumers to avoid these products, could be beneficial for individuals with FA in Canada, as products without PAL would result in very few and generally mild adverse reactions.
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.