ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Enhancing HACCP Decisions: A Comparative Risk Assessment for Table Olive Processing.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Table olive processing comprises multiple stages in which physical, chemical, and biological hazards may occur. Although risk assessment is a core element of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) systems, the selection of assessment tools remains insufficiently standardized. This study compared a 4 × 4 risk matrix and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for hazard evaluation in Spanish-style and Californian-style table olive processing. Hazards were assessed across 41 processing stages for Spanish-style olives and selected key stages for Californian-style olives using probability × severity in the 4 × 4 matrix and severity × occurrence × detection in FMEA. Significant hazards were further evaluated using the Codex Alimentarius decision tree to identify critical control points (CCPs) and strengthened prerequisite programs (PRPs). Both tools identified similar significant hazards, including biological hazards associated with fermentation, brine management, storage, container sealing, and heat treatment, as well as physical hazards from foreign bodies and chemical hazards related to heavy metals, pesticide residues, mycotoxins, and food-contact material migration. FMEA provided greater analytical detail through the detection parameter, whereas the 4 × 4 matrix was simpler and more practical for complex flow diagrams. Overall, both tools were suitable for HACCP-based risk assessment in table olive processing.
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.