Are food exposures obtained through commercial market panels representative of the general population? Implications for outbreak investigations
Rattachement africain : gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Current methods of control recruitment for case-control studies can be slow (a particular issue for outbreak investigations), resource-intensive and subject to a range of biases. Commercial market panels are a potential source of rapidly recruited controls. Our study evaluated food exposure data from these panel controls, compared with an established reference dataset. Market panel data were collected from two companies using retrospective internet-based surveys; these were compared with reference data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS). We used logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios to compare exposure to each of the 71 food items between the market panel and NDNS participants. We compared 2103 panel controls with 2696 reference participants. Adjusted for socio-demographic factors, exposure to 90% of foods was statistically different between both panels and the reference data. However, these differences were likely to be of limited practical importance for 89% of Panel A foods and 79% of Panel B foods. Market panel food exposures were comparable with reference data for common food exposures but more likely to be different for uncommon exposures. This approach should be considered for outbreak investigation, in conjunction with other considerations such as population at risk, timeliness of response and study resources.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Are food exposures obtained through commercial market panels representative of the general population? Implications for outbreak investigations
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2019
- Éditeur
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
University of Liverpool Institute of Psychology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Public Health England pays non établi dans la noticeOrganisme public
-
Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
University of Warwick Warwick Medical School pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Field Service pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
Institute of Psychology — University of Liverpool, Public Health England et Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, avec 2 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.