ArticleJournal of food science2025
A Comparative Analysis of Risk-Based Food Safety Inspection Methods Across EU Countries and Canada.
Article in Journal of food science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of foodborne disease surveillance in China: A 32-year journey from monitoring to early warning.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Temporal Screening of High-Risk Food Service Inspections in New York State, 2023-2025: A Case Study Using Multimodal Evidential Learning.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Risk-Based Food Safety Inspection Methods Across EU Countries and Canada.Journal of food science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the expansion of global trade and the emergence of new food products, food safety risks have increased, making foodborne illnesses a significant global public health issue. In this context, and given the limited regulatory resources, risk-based food safety inspections of food business operators are essential for controlling foodborne disease outbreaks and ensuring food safety. However, the absence of transparency in risk-based inspection methods limits cross-country learning and hinders the enhancement of food safety control. This study analyzed risk-based inspection methods employed in nine EU countries and Canada, combining expert interviews and document analysis. By identifying risk factors, risk categorization processes, and common challenges, our findings provide practical insights for developing and refining future risk-based methods. Our analysis reveals that inherent and compliance-related factors often serve as fundamental factors. However, mitigating factors and subjective factors, such as food safety culture, remain underutilized in practice. Two dominant risk categorization and inspection frequency assignment processes are summarized: a two-layer grouping process and a single-layer scoring process. The latter offers greater flexibility, enabling the integration of a broader range of risk factors. Through critically evaluating existing methods, this study offers actionable insights to improve risk-based inspection methods, fostering future harmonization and reducing food safety risks globally.
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.