ArticlePloS one2025
Hygienic practices and associated factors in slaughterhouses and meat retail shops in Hawasa City, Ethiopia.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meat hygiene and safety practices among food establishments in Debre Markos Town, Ethiopia: a One Health approach, 2025.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Occurrence and Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles ofInternational journal of veterinary science and medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn developing countries, animals are often slaughtered and dressed in unsanitary settings, thus endangering the microbiological quality and safety of the meat obtained. In addition, slaughterhouses and retail outlets are the regions most vulnerable to cross-contamination with meat. As a result, the objective of this study was to evaluate slaughterhouse and meat retail shop hygiene practices and to determine the causes of unsanitary meat handling in slaughterhouses and retail shops.
methods165 butcher men from a municipal slaughterhouse and every retail meat store in Hawassa city participated in this investigation, which was carried out using an institution-based cross-sectional study design between March 22 and May 30, 2022. Data was collected through interviewer-administered standardized questionnaires and an observation checklist. Data was entered using Epidata software version 3.1.1, and it was exported for further analysis using SPSS version 25. A cutoff point of P.V < 0.25 was employed for the bivariate model to control possible confounders. A binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors, the findings were displayed as the 95% confidence interval for the crude odds ratio and adjusted odds ratio. The level of significance was assessed using cutoff points of P < 0.05.
resultsThe prevalence of good hygienic practices was 25.5% [95% CI: (18.2-32.1)]. Attitude (fair attitude) [AOR = 0.157; 95% CI: (0.037, 0.659)], cleanness and disinfection of waste container status [AOR = 12.64; 95% CI: (3.936-40.562)], regular supervision by health offices [AOR = 0.176; 95% CI: (0.35-0.894)], health and safety training [AOR = 3.46; 95% CI: (1.054-11.344)], and Removal of personal items during meat processing [AOR = 0.036; 95% CI: (0.008-0.150)] were factors that were significantly associated with poor hygienic practices.
conclusionThe prevalence of good hygienic practices was low. After adjusting for possible confounding factors, attitudes, cleanness and disinfection of waste containers, regular supervision by health offices, health and safety training and Removal of personal items during meat processing (behavioral factor) were significantly associated with hygienic practices. These findings could call for appropriate prevention strategies based on cognitive domains and practice.
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.