Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41313151›Full record

ArticleItalian journal of food safety2026

Assessment of the bacteriological contamination of selected street foods in open and closed environments in the city of Lucknow.

Ruchi Verma, Sunita Mishra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Italian journal of food safety, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Ruchi VermaDepartment of Food and Nutrition, School for Home Sciences, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University (A central university), Vidya Vihar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.ORCID 0000-0002-5415-6348
Sunita MishraDepartment of Food and Nutrition, School for Home Sciences, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University (A central university), Vidya Vihar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In developing countries, the urban population's association with street food is significant. Consumers favor street food because of its convenience, affordability, and palatability. Nevertheless, the majority of street foods are detrimental to health. The present study aimed to assess the bacteriological quality of selected street foods in open and closed environments in the city of Lucknow. This study focused on 6 street food samples and 120 vendors' hygiene practices. The 6 food samples were selected from open-air stalls, and the same 6 food samples were selected from indoor shops that were randomly selected from 4 different locations in the city of Lucknow. The results of this study revealed that the samples collected from the open-air stalls were contaminated with pathogenic bacteria ranging from 9.44±0.96 log10 to 6.11±1.06 log10 (p<0.05). According to the questionnaire results, 81% of respondents were unaware of dish towels, hand washing, cutting nails, covering heads, and using gloves, and 94% of vendors were unaware of practices of knife and cutting board contamination. The findings of this study indicate that the street foods from the indoor shops were served under hygienic conditions, whereas the foods from the open-air stalls were served under unhygienic conditions that were not good for human health. However, in order to improve the final quality of these street foods, further strategies are needed, such as the street food makers' training, with the aim of applying good hygienic practices during production.

Indexed as

GHPspathogenic bacteriapracticesStreet foodsvendors

Identifiers

PMID41313151
PMCPMC13003392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.