Food safety policies and their effectiveness to prevent foodborne diseases in catering establishments: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Despite being largely preventable, foodborne diseases continue to be of major concern worldwide. Research has shown that interventions relying on food handling training programs and standard food safety practices have a direct impact on food handler's knowledge and attitudes. However, to date, evidence on the effectiveness of policies in reducing microbial count in food is sparse and inconclusive. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarize the evidence on the potential of food safety policies in catering establishments as a means to prevent foodborne diseases. A search for relevant publications was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, ProQuest, CINAHL and ERIC databases. Retrieved studies were summarised in terms of context, population, outcome, methodology, risk of bias and intervention type. Eight studies were included in the qualitative analysis and the meta-analysis. Food safety interventions were associated with a statistically significant microbial reduction of 28.6% (95% CI: -30.6% to -26.7%). Four subgroup analyses were conducted: by type of microorganism screened, by sample origin, by type of food establishment, and by sample collection time post-intervention. Microbial reductions were consistent across each of the subgroups. Findings suggest that policies such as programs based on the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) could be effective strategies to prevent foodborne diseases from occurring in foodservice establishments at the end of the food supply chain. However, the underlying evidence suffers from risk of bias and more randomized controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies are needed in this field.

A comparative assessment of action plans on antimicrobial resistance from OECD and G20 countries using natural language processing.

Following the launch of the Global Action Plan on antimicrobial resistance (AMR-GAP) in 2015, most OECD and G20 countries developed their own national action plans (AMR-NAPs). This is the first paper that deploys natural language processing (NLP) techniques to systematically measure and compare the extent to which AMR-NAPs from 21 OECD and G20 countries align with the AMR-GAP in terms of the strategic objectives and interventions. We quantify the extent of alignment based on two NLP metrics: term-frequency (TF) and term-frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF). Quantifying TF allows us to compare the relative prominence of strategic objectives and interventions, whereas quantifying TF-IDF enables us to identify interventions that occur more frequently in each AMR-NAP. Similar to the AMR-GAP, in our sample, terms associated with optimizing antimicrobial use in human and animal health have the highest frequency (TF = 0. 287), whereas terms linked to raising AMR awareness and education have the lowest frequency (TF = 0.066). Substantial cross-country variation exists in the distribution of interventions that are distinctly frequent in each AMR-NAP. We also report new evidence on the selected policy design and monitoring and evaluation features of these documents. Our results suggest a high degree of congruence between the AMR-GAP and AMR-NAPs, with notable diversity in the spate of interventions that OECD and G20 countries discuss in their action plans.

Relationship of socio-demographics, comorbidities, symptoms and healthcare access with early COVID-19 presentation and disease severity.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 studies are primarily from the inpatient setting, skewing towards severe disease. Race and comorbidities predict hospitalization, however, ambulatory presentation of milder COVID-19 disease and characteristics associated with progression to severe disease is not well-understood. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review including all COVID-19 positive cases from Stanford Health Care (SHC) in March 2020 to assess demographics, comorbidities and symptoms in relationship to: 1) their access point of testing (outpatient, inpatient, and emergency room (ER)) and 2) development of severe disease. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-seven patients tested positive: 127 (49%), 96 (37%), and 34 (13%) at outpatient, ER and inpatient, respectively. Overall, 61% were age < 55; age > 75 was rarer in outpatient setting (11%) than ER (14%) or inpatient (24%). Most patients presented with cough (86%), fever/chills (76%), or fatigue (63%). 65% of inpatients reported shortness of breath compared to 30-32% of outpatients and ER patients. Ethnic/minority patients had a significantly higher risk of developing severe disease (Asian OR = 4.8 [1.6-14.2], Hispanic OR = 3.6 [1.1-11.9]). Medicare-insured patients were marginally more likely (OR = 4.0 [0.9-17.8]). Other factors associated with developing severe disease included kidney disease (OR = 6.1 [1.0-38.1]), cardiovascular disease (OR = 4.7 [1.0-22.1], shortness of breath (OR = 5.4 [2.3-12.6]) and GI symptoms (OR = 3.3 [1.4-7.7]; hypertension without concomitant CVD or kidney disease was marginally significant (OR = 2.3 [0.8-6.5]). CONCLUSIONS: Early widespread symptomatic testing for COVID-19 in Silicon Valley included many less severely ill patients. Thorough manual review of symptomatology reconfirms the heterogeneity of COVID-19 symptoms, and challenges in using clinical characteristics to predict decline. We re-demonstrate that socio-demographics are consistently associated with severity.