The Impact of Consumer Phase Models in Microbial Risk Analysis

Risk Analysis

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 255-265

  Nauta, Maarten ^a   Christensen, Bjarke ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Campylobacter; Consumer phase; Food microbiology

Indexed keywords

CAMPYLOBACTERS; CONSUMER PHASE; CONTROL MEASURES; DOSE RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS; FOOD CHAIN; FOOD HANDLING; FOOD MICROBIOLOGY; HUMAN EXPOSURES; OBSERVATIONAL DATA; PHASE MODEL; QUANTITATIVE MICROBIOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENTS; RELATIVE RISKS; SINGLE INPUT;

ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE; MICROORGANISMS; PURCHASING; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK PERCEPTION; SALES;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

BACTERIUM; BIOINDICATOR; DATA ASSIMILATION; DISEASE PREVALENCE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP; FOOD CHAIN; MICROBIAL ACTIVITY; POLLUTION EXPOSURE; POULTRY; PROBABILITY; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CAMPYLOBACTER; CHICKEN; FOOD; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; MICROBIOLOGY; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; CAMPYLOBACTER; CHICKENS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; POULTRY PRODUCTS; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION BEHAVIOR;

CAMPYLOBACTER;

EID: 79951524447     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01481.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Anonymous. Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbial Risk Assessment. Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC). Secretariat of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Rome, Italy FAO, 1999.
2. Nauta MJ, Hill A, Rosenquist H, Brynestad S, Fetsch A, Van Der Logt P, Fazil A, Christensen B, Katsma E, Borck B, Havelaar AH. A comparison of risk assessments onCampylobacterin broiler meat. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2009; 129:107-123.
3. Fischer ARH, De Jonge AEI, De Jonge R, Frewer LJ, Nauta MJ. Improving food safety in the domestic environment: The need for a transdisciplinary approach. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25(3):503-517.
4. Redmond EC, Griffith CJ. Consumer food handling in the home: A review of food safety studies. Journal of Food Protection, 2003; 66:130-161.
5. Zwietering M. Quantitative risk assessment: Is more complex always better? Simple is not stupid and complex is not always more correct. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2009; 134:57-62.
6. Nauta MJ. Risk assessment modelling of the food handling processes mixing and partitioning. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2005; 100:311-322.
7. Christensen BB, Rosenquist H, Sommer HM, Nielsen NL, Fagt S, Andersen NL, Norrung B. A model of hygiene practices and consumption patterns in the consumer phase. Risk Analysis, 2005; 25;49-60.
8. Nauta MJ, Jacobs-Reitsma W, Havelaar AH. A risk assessment model forCampylobacterin broiler meat. Risk Analysis, 2007; 27;845-861.
9. Brynestad S, Luber P, Braute L, Bartelt E. Quantitative microbiological risk assessment of campylobacteriosis cases in the German population due to consumption of chicken prepared in home. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 2008; 8:194-213.
10. Lindqvist R, Lindblad M. Quantitative risk assessment of thermophilicCampylobacterspp. and cross-contamination during handling of raw broiler chickens evaluating strategies at the producer level to reduce human campylobacteriosis in Sweden. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2008; 121:41-52.
11. Christensen B, Sommer H, Nielsen N, Rosenquist H. Risk Assessment ofCampylobacter jejuniin Chicken Products. Copenhagen, Denmark Danish Veterinary and Food Administration, 2001.
12. Teunis PF, Havelaar AH. The Beta Poisson dose-response model is not a single-hit model. Risk Analysis, 2000; 20:513-520.
13. Black R, Levine MM, Clements ML, Hughes TP, Blaser MJ. ExperimentalCampylobacter jejuniinfection in humans. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1988; 157:472-479.
14. Vose D. Risk Analysis, a Quantitative Guide, 2nd ed. Chichester, UK Wiley, 2000.
15. Anonymous. Risk Assessment ofCampylobacterspp. in Broiler Chickens andVibriospp. in Seafood, a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation. Bangkok, Thailand, 5-9 Aug 2002.
16. Anonymous. Risk Assessment ofCampylobacterspp. in Broiler Chickens: Technical Report. Rome FAO/WHO, Microbiological Risk Assessment Series no. 12, 2010.
17. Mylius SD, Nauta MJ, Havelaar AH. Cross-contamination during food preparation: A mechanistic model applied to chicken-borneCampylobacter. Risk Analysis, 2007; 27:803-813.
18. Van Asselt ED, De Jong AEI, De Jonge R, Nauta MJ. 2008. Cross-contamination in the kitchen: Estimation of transfer rates for cutting boards, hands and knives. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2008; 104:1392-1401.
19. De Jong AEI, Verhoeff-Bakkenes L, Nauta MJ, De Jonge R. Cross-contamination in the kitchen: Effect of hygiene measures. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2008; 105:615-624.
20. Nauta MJ, Fischer ARH, Van Asselt ED, De Jong AEI, Frewer LJ, De Jonge R. Food safety in the domestic environment: The effect of consumer risk information on human disease risks. Risk Analysis, 2008; 28:179-192.
21. Luber P, Brynestad S, Topsch D, Scherer K, Bartelt E. Quantification ofCampylobacter species cross-contamination during handling of contaminated fresh chicken parts in kitchens. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2006; 72:66-70.
22. Calistri P, Giovannini A. Quantitative risk assessment of human campylobacteriosis related to the consumption of chicken meat in two Italian regions. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2008; 128:274-287.
23. Teunis P, Van Den Brandhof W, Nauta M, Wagenaar J, Van Den Kerkhof H, Van Pelt W. A reconsideration of theCampylobacterdose-response relation. Epidemiology and Infection, 2005; 133:5583-592.
24. Havelaar AH, Mangen M-JJ, De Koeijer AA, Bogaardt M-J, Evers EG, Jacobs-Reitsma WF, Van Pelt W, Wagenaar JA, De Wit GA, Van Der Zee H, Nauta MJ. Effectiveness and efficiency of controlling Campylobacter on broiler chicken meat. Risk Analysis, 2007; 27:831-844.
25. Nauta MJ, Havelaar AH. Risk-based standards for Campylobacter in the broiler meat chain. Food Control, 2008; 19:372-381.
26. Gellynck X, Messens W, Halet D, Grijspeerdt K, Hartnett E, Viaene J. Economics of reducing Campylobacter at different levels within the Belgian poultry meat chain. Journal of Food Protection, 2008; 71:479-485.
27. Nauta MJ, Van Der Wal FJ, Putirulan FF, Post J, Van de Kassteele J, Bolder NM. Evaluation of the "testing and scheduling" strategy for control ofCampylobacterin broiler meat in the Netherlands. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 2009; 134:216-222.
28. Teunis P, Nagelkerke ND, Haas CN. Dose response models for infectious gastroenteritis. Risk Analysis, 1999; 19:1251-1260.
29. Anonymous. The use of microbiological risk assessment outputs to develop practical risk management strategies: Metrics to improve food safety. Report of a joint FAO/WHO expert meeting, Kiel, Germany, 2006.
30. Van Asselt E, Fischer A, De Jong AEI, Nauta MJ, De Jonge R. Cooking practices in the kitchen-Observed versus predicted behavior. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29:533-540.
31. Havelaar AH, Evers EG, Nauta MJ. Challenges of quantitative microbial risk assessment at EU level. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 2008; 19:S22-S29.