Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39139278›Full record

ArticleNIHR open research2023

Understanding the impact funding cuts on Environmental and regulatory services and gastrointestinal infections: a longitudinal ecological study.

Lauren Murrell, Helen Clough, Roger Gibb, Xingna Zhang, Mark Green, Marie Chattaway, Iain Buchan, Benjamin Barr, Daniel Hungerford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NIHR open research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. A novel comparative evaluation of multiplex PCR panels for gastrointestinal pathogen detection: Seegene Allplex™ vs. Luminex NxTAGEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
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

9 authors.

Lauren MurrellHealth Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0203-5074
Helen CloughHealth Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.
Roger GibbHealth Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.
Xingna ZhangHealth Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8849-2112
Mark GreenDepartment of Geography and Planning, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GF, UK.
Marie ChattawayHealth Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5288-9089
Iain BuchanDepartment of Public Health, Policy & Systems, University of Liverpool, Institute of Population Health, Liverpool, L69 3GF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3392-1650
Benjamin Barr *Health Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.
Daniel Hungerford *Health Protection Research Unit in Gastrointestinal Infections, University of Liverpool, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Liverpool, England, L69 7BE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9770-0163

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) infections result in 17 million cases annually, with foodborne illness costing the National Health Service (NHS) £60m per year. The burden of GI infection is unequally distributed, with greater impact in more socioeconomically disadvantaged groups and areas. Local authorities (LA) provide vital services that protect public health and wellbeing. The impact of funding cuts to local services and their effect on public health is an area of concern. Environmental and regulatory (ER) services are responsible for roles such as food safety and infectious disease control. This study aims to understand the impact of local funding cuts on ER and GI infection outcomes. Methods: We will conduct an ecological longitudinal study in England from 2010-2019 at the LA level to examine how changes in ER expenditure overtime have impacted ER and GI infection outcomes. Data will be gathered on food hygiene enforcement, food hygiene compliance levels, GI infection hospitalisation, NHS 111 calls relating to GI infection symptoms, GI infection pathogen data, deprivation, and population density. Measures will be aggregated to LA level and statistical analysis will be carried out. Ethics and dissemination: University of Liverpool Ethics committee have confirmed ethical approval will not be required. All data will be aggregated and anonymised, therefore only data sharing agreements will be required. Findings will be disseminated to the stakeholder group in addition to outputs through conferences and publications. These findings will help understand impact of key services on public health and should inform government and public health policy and strategy.

Indexed as

environmental health and regulatory servicesFood hygieneFood safetyGastrointestinal infectioninequalitieslocal funding cuts

Identifiers

PMID39139278
PMCPMC11320035

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.