SynthesisComprehensive reviews in food science and food safety2026
Measuring Food Safety Culture: A Systematic Review of Questionnaire Dimensions and Validation Practices.
Synthesis in Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety, 2026. 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.
- Cultivating Safety: How Food Safety Champions Translate Regulatory Compliance into Frontline Practice.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An organization's food safety culture (FSC) is increasingly being recognized as a key factor in its food safety performance. The reliable measurement of FSC is therefore crucial for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of food companies in food safety performance, enabling them to guide continuous improvement. While questionnaires are the most widely used tool for FSC assessment, existing instruments vary considerably in their scope, structure, and methodological rigor, which limits the consistency, comparability, and practical utility of these instruments. This review systematically examines all publicly available FSC questionnaires to consolidate the knowledge about their scope, content, and validation practices. Specifically, the review (1) outlines the characteristics of FSC studies and tracks the evolution of their questionnaires; (2) identifies and clusters the dimensions across instruments, highlighting commonalities and differences of the scope across questionnaires; (3) summarizes the items used within each clustered dimension to illustrate how FSC is operationalized; (4) examines all the validation methods employed; and (5) outlines opportunities for further development and application of FSC questionnaires. This article reveals significant diversity in theoretical frameworks, conceptual scope, and focus areas of detailed items, as well as notable gaps in validation practices. The findings provide a comprehensive overview of existing tools, offer practical guidance for researchers, industry practitioners, and regulators on selecting or developing robust questionnaires, and highlight the need for greater methodological rigor in the future development of FSC questionnaires.
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.