 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 9 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 2362 | 回復(fù): 8 | ||
juno_銀蟲 (初入文壇)
|
[求助]
請強(qiáng)人們幫忙翻譯個文獻(xiàn)��！十萬火急！
|
|
Abstract: This communication deals with the use of meta-analysis as a valuable tool for the synthesis of food safety research, and in quantitative risk assessment modelling. A common methodology for the conduction of meta-analysis (i.e., systematic review and data extraction, parameterisation of effect size, estimation of overall effect size, assessment of heterogeneity, and presentation of results) is explained by reviewing two meta-analyses derived from separate sets of primary studies of Salmonella in pork. Integrating different primary studies, the first meta-analysis elucidated for the first time a relationship between the proportion of Salmonella-carrier slaughter pigs entering the slaughter lines and the resulting proportion of contaminated carcasses at the point of evisceration; finding that the individual studies on their own could not reveal. On the other hand, the second application showed that meta-analysis can be used to estimate the overall effect of a critical process stage (chilling) on the incidence of the pathogen under study. The derivation of a relationship between variables and a probabilistic distribution is illustrations of the valuable quantitative information synthesised by the meta-analytical tools, which can be incorporated in risk assessment modelling. Strengths and weaknesses of meta-analysis within the context of food safety are also discussed. 1. Introduction Meta-analysis refers to the statistical analysis of a large collection of results from individual studies, such as experimental studies, opinion surveys and causal models, for the purpose of integrating the findings (Glass, 1976). Although interest in synthesizing findings dates back to the work of Yates and Cochran (1938) who combined results of different agricultural studies, it appears however that the sole introduction of a term for this collection of studies (‘meta-analysis’ as coined by Glass,1976) led to an upsurge in the development and application, principally in medicine and social sciences. The primary aim of meta-analysis is to produce a more precise estimate of the effect of a particular intervention or treatment, with an increased statistical power. Since different primary studies are performed using different populations, different designs and a whole-range of other specific factors, it has been suggested that combining them would produce an estimate that has broader generalisability than is possible using only a single study (Sutton et al., 2001). Additionally, meta-analysis can be used to get an insight of the sources of heterogeneity or differences among the results of the primary research. In this sense, meta-analysis not only investigates the reported results of the studies but all aspects of research designs that produced them, such as theoretical constructs, operational definitions of variables, population samples, data collection procedures, statistical analysis, and especially the handling of possible confounding variables that would provide an alternative explanation for the reported results (Noble, 2006). As stated by Sargeant et al. (2006), the prevention of food-borne illnesses is complex because of the multiple stages in the production and preparation of food. On the other hand, the amount of data produced by food safety research have been growing increasingly in the last ten years, and the advances in information technology are likely to further contribute to this growth. Therefore, there is a need for conducting meta-analysis in the field of food safety, to identify, evaluate and synthesize results, so that policy-makers can access evidence-based and concise information on the effectiveness of interventions to control and prevent food-borne illnesses in humans (Sargeant et al., 2005). Although, in principle, meta-analysis may be conducted to address a broad range of food safety research questions such as effect of interventions pre-harvest (for instance, interventions to reduce faecal shedding of Escherichia coli O157 in beef cattle), effect of interventions post-harvest (for instance, effect of carcass rinsing on Salmonella), disease incidence, prevalence of pathogens, consumer practices, etc., applications in food safety research are still in its infancy. The findings of such independent meta-analyses can offer valuable information on the best interventions and can provide data as input into risk assessment models. To date, only six published studies using meta-analysis as a tool to combine food safety data have been identified (Patil et al., 2004; Vialette et al., 2005; Sánchez et al., 2007; Bollaerts et al., 2008; Gonzales-Barron et al., 2008; Gonzales-Barron et al., 2009). This article aims to (i) present the general objectives and methodology of meta-analysis and its relevance for the synthesis of food safety research by reviewing two applications, and (ii) to highlight its use in risk assessment modelling discussing its strengths and weaknesses. 2.Connclsions While meta-analysis is not without limitations (underpowered primary research and publication bias), its systematic approach comprising a broad range of techniques merits consideration among food safety researchers to integrate the current body of knowledge and data on targeted issues along the complex continuum of agro-food production, and to furnish increased credibility to findings in the field. As reviewed in the two metaanalysis applications, while primary studies might be weak or reach contradictory conclusions, the body of information contained in all studies might reveal a clearer picture of the state of knowledge, and can offer valuable quantitative information of effect size in the form of distributions that can be inserted into risk assessment models. Meta-analysis can highlight areas where there is insufficient evidence of the efficacy of interventions, where there is absence of high quality studies, or where there are common methodological flaws in the available research, and can therefore provide direction for future research. Acknowledgments The authors wish to acknowledge Safe Food, The Food Safety Promotion Board and the Food Institutional Research Measure (FIRM) administered by the Irish Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. |
回復(fù)此樓» 猜你喜歡
0955求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有1人回復(fù)
-
0832食品調(diào)劑推薦
已經(jīng)有0人回復(fù)
-
食品科學(xué)論文潤色/翻譯怎么收費(fèi)?
已經(jīng)有53人回復(fù)
-
食品調(diào)劑-總分291-有中核論文導(dǎo)師一作、本人二作-一志愿南昌大學(xué)學(xué)碩-介紹詳細(xì)
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
-
法國里爾大學(xué)_INRAE 2026招收食品方向CSC博士生
已經(jīng)有0人回復(fù)
-
331求調(diào)劑，一志愿合工大食品工程（086003）
已經(jīng)有2人回復(fù)
-
303分一志愿江南大學(xué)發(fā)酵工程學(xué)碩本科參加競賽有實(shí)驗室經(jīng)歷有酒廠質(zhì)檢員工作經(jīng)歷
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
331食品工程求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有1人回復(fù)
-
一志愿福建農(nóng)林大學(xué) 09 食品與營養(yǎng) 初試323
已經(jīng)有0人回復(fù)
-
08600生物與醫(yī)藥調(diào)劑，其他方向也可以
已經(jīng)有0人回復(fù)
» 本主題相關(guān)價值貼推薦，對您同樣有幫助:
- 幫忙翻譯幾段英文文獻(xiàn)
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
- 幫忙翻譯一段英文文獻(xiàn)
已經(jīng)有3人回復(fù)
- 幫忙翻譯下文獻(xiàn)啊 正在做實(shí)驗 急急急啊
已經(jīng)有1人回復(fù)
- 幫忙翻譯一篇有機(jī)化學(xué)文獻(xiàn)的題目跟摘要 要準(zhǔn)確點(diǎn) 謝謝
已經(jīng)有1人回復(fù)
- 十萬火急�。。D三圖四是怎么畫出來的
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
- 德文文獻(xiàn)的一段，麻煩幫忙翻譯一下
已經(jīng)有1人回復(fù)
- 求助幫忙翻譯文獻(xiàn)
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- 急！幫忙翻譯一些分子生物學(xué)方面的英文文獻(xiàn)段落
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
- 【求助】幫忙翻譯一下文獻(xiàn)（有機(jī)合成）
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
ycyycy
金蟲 (小有名氣)
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 755.4
- 帖子: 267
- 在線: 55.6小時
- 蟲號: 532299
- 注冊: 2008-03-24
- 性別: GG
- 專業(yè): 生物大分子結(jié)構(gòu)與功能
2樓2011-05-19 14:09:32
 |
3樓2011-05-19 22:18:57
 |
4樓2011-05-20 11:07:11
5樓2011-05-20 11:08:46
魔術(shù)
金蟲 (知名作家)
- 食品EPI: 7
- 應(yīng)助: 95 (初中生)
- 貴賓: 0.052
- 金幣: 4709.1
- 散金: 5235
- 紅花: 34
- 沙發(fā): 2
- 帖子: 5042
- 在線: 1158.9小時
- 蟲號: 891719
- 注冊: 2009-11-02
- 專業(yè): 食品科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)
6樓2011-05-20 13:49:47
魔術(shù)
金蟲 (知名作家)
- 食品EPI: 7
- 應(yīng)助: 95 (初中生)
- 貴賓: 0.052
- 金幣: 4709.1
- 散金: 5235
- 紅花: 34
- 沙發(fā): 2
- 帖子: 5042
- 在線: 1158.9小時
- 蟲號: 891719
- 注冊: 2009-11-02
- 專業(yè): 食品科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)
7樓2011-05-20 13:50:33
魔術(shù)
金蟲 (知名作家)
- 食品EPI: 7
- 應(yīng)助: 95 (初中生)
- 貴賓: 0.052
- 金幣: 4709.1
- 散金: 5235
- 紅花: 34
- 沙發(fā): 2
- 帖子: 5042
- 在線: 1158.9小時
- 蟲號: 891719
- 注冊: 2009-11-02
- 專業(yè): 食品科學(xué)基礎(chǔ)
★
小損樣兒(金幣+1): 感謝熱心的魔術(shù)，授人以漁…… 2011-05-21 17:21:05
小損樣兒(金幣+1): 感謝熱心的魔術(shù)，授人以漁…… 2011-05-21 17:21:05
|
http://dict.cnki.net/ 百度詞典 谷歌詞典 詞霸（貌似有金山詞霸和愛詞霸還有谷歌詞霸，我一直沒分清，你自己琢磨去吧） 有道 靈格斯 把我知道的這幾個翻譯的軟件或網(wǎng)址給說下吧，希望對你有幫助，前四個我常用，第一個網(wǎng)址，專業(yè)性的詞語有時比較準(zhǔn)確，句子，那個都不是很準(zhǔn)，基本我個人覺得還是自己順一遍的好 |
8樓2011-05-21 10:20:41
juno_
銀蟲 (初入文壇)
- 應(yīng)助: 0 (幼兒園)
- 金幣: 623.5
- 帖子: 48
- 在線: 28.2小時
- 蟲號: 1247648
- 注冊: 2011-03-28
- 性別: MM
- 專業(yè): 食品加工技術(shù)
9樓2011-05-21 12:43:29
相關(guān)版塊跳轉(zhuǎn)
我要訂閱樓主 juno_ 的主題更新
| 9 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué)調(diào)劑 ，六級已過，有科研經(jīng)歷 +9 | 曦熙兮 2026-03-15 | 9/450 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 304求調(diào)劑 +11 | 小熊joy 2026-03-14 | 12/600 |
|
|
|
[考研] 301求調(diào)劑 +9 | yy要上岸呀 2026-03-17 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 296求調(diào)劑 +5 | 大口吃飯 身體健 2026-03-13 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 341求調(diào)劑 +5 | 搗蛋豬豬 2026-03-11 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 274求調(diào)劑0856材料化工 +13 | z2839474511 2026-03-11 | 14/700 |
|
|
|
[考研] 有沒有道鐵/土木的想調(diào)劑南林，給自己招師弟中～ +3 | TqlXswl 2026-03-16 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 285化工學(xué)碩求調(diào)劑（081700） +9 | 柴郡貓_ 2026-03-12 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料專碩274一志愿陜西師范大學(xué)求調(diào)劑 +5 | 薛云鵬 2026-03-13 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] [導(dǎo)師推薦]西南科技大學(xué)國防/材料導(dǎo)師推薦 +3 | 尖角小荷 2026-03-16 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085600調(diào)劑 +5 | 漾漾123sun 2026-03-12 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工一志愿南昌大學(xué)327求調(diào)劑推薦 +7 | Ncdx123456 2026-03-13 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 0703 物理化學(xué)調(diào)劑 +3 | 我可以上岸的對?/a> 2026-03-13 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 0856求調(diào)劑 +3 | 劉夢微 2026-03-15 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 080500，材料學(xué)碩302分求調(diào)劑學(xué)校 +4 | 初識可樂 2026-03-14 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料工程調(diào)劑 +9 | 咪咪空空 2026-03-12 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué)一志愿211 總分320求調(diào)劑 +5 | 瑪卡巴卡啊哈 2026-03-11 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 工科，求調(diào)劑 +3 | 我887 2026-03-11 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 289求調(diào)劑 +3 | 李政瑩 2026-03-12 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 化工學(xué)碩306求調(diào)劑 +9 | 42838695 2026-03-12 | 9/450 |
|