| 查看: 2210 | 回复: 8 | |||
[求助]
请强人们帮忙翻译个文献！！十万火急！
|
|
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. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
【不合理蛙科研实验干货分享】石墨炉原子吸收测米铅镉铬小结
已经有0人回复
-
【不合理蛙科研实验交流分享】有机研萃促交流，协同创新拓前沿
已经有0人回复
-
食品科学论文润色/翻译怎么收费?
已经有200人回复
-
【不合理蛙科研基础检测分享】原子吸收测元素，细调火焰稳基线
已经有0人回复
-
【不合理蛙科研实验干货分享】乳脂检测避坑记：温度离心定成败
已经有0人回复
-
【不合理蛙科研实验干货】微波消解测四素，钙铁锌硒一次清
已经有0人回复
-
【不合理蛙科研实验分享】梯度稀释控杂菌，限量计数不踩坑
已经有0人回复
-
[不合理蛙科研实验干货分享]实操食品微生物限量检测 筑牢实验严谨根基
已经有0人回复
-
[不合理蛙科研实验干货分享]实操食品微生物限量检测 筑牢实验严谨根基
已经有0人回复
-
[不合理蛙科研实验分享]实操粗脂肪测定实验 深耕食品科研基本功
已经有0人回复
-
[不合理蛙科研实验基础分享]实操索氏抽提法测脂肪 夯实实验硬本领
已经有0人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 帮忙翻译几段英文文献
已经有3人回复
- 帮忙翻译一段英文文献
已经有3人回复
- 帮忙翻译下文献啊 正在做实验 急急急啊
已经有1人回复
- 帮忙翻译一篇有机化学文献的题目跟摘要 要准确点 谢谢
已经有1人回复
- 十万火急！！！图三图四是怎么画出来的
已经有4人回复
- 德文文献的一段，麻烦帮忙翻译一下
已经有1人回复
- 求助帮忙翻译文献
已经有5人回复
- 急！帮忙翻译一些分子生物学方面的英文文献段落
已经有6人回复
- 【求助】帮忙翻译一下文献（有机合成）
已经有7人回复
ycyycy
金虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 755.4
- 帖子: 267
- 在线: 55.6小时
- 虫号: 532299
- 注册: 2008-03-24
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 生物大分子结构与功能
2楼2011-05-19 14:09:32
 |
3楼2011-05-19 22:18:57
 |
4楼2011-05-20 11:07:11
5楼2011-05-20 11:08:46
魔术
金虫 (知名作家)
- 食品EPI: 7
- 应助: 95 (初中生)
- 贵宾: 0.052
- 金币: 4709.1
- 散金: 5235
- 红花: 34
- 沙发: 2
- 帖子: 5042
- 在线: 1158.9小时
- 虫号: 891719
- 注册: 2009-11-02
- 专业: 食品科学基础
6楼2011-05-20 13:49:47
魔术
金虫 (知名作家)
- 食品EPI: 7
- 应助: 95 (初中生)
- 贵宾: 0.052
- 金币: 4709.1
- 散金: 5235
- 红花: 34
- 沙发: 2
- 帖子: 5042
- 在线: 1158.9小时
- 虫号: 891719
- 注册: 2009-11-02
- 专业: 食品科学基础
7楼2011-05-20 13:50:33
魔术
金虫 (知名作家)
- 食品EPI: 7
- 应助: 95 (初中生)
- 贵宾: 0.052
- 金币: 4709.1
- 散金: 5235
- 红花: 34
- 沙发: 2
- 帖子: 5042
- 在线: 1158.9小时
- 虫号: 891719
- 注册: 2009-11-02
- 专业: 食品科学基础
★
小损样儿(金币+1): 感谢热心的魔术，授人以渔…… 2011-05-21 17:21:05
小损样儿(金币+1): 感谢热心的魔术，授人以渔…… 2011-05-21 17:21:05
|
http://dict.cnki.net/ 百度词典 谷歌词典 词霸（貌似有金山词霸和爱词霸还有谷歌词霸，我一直没分清，你自己琢磨去吧） 有道 灵格斯 把我知道的这几个翻译的软件或网址给说下吧，希望对你有帮助，前四个我常用，第一个网址，专业性的词语有时比较准确，句子，那个都不是很准，基本我个人觉得还是自己顺一遍的好 |
8楼2011-05-21 10:20:41
9楼2011-05-21 12:43:29