A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Assessing reliability and validity of food safety culture assessment tools. | LitMetric

Assessing reliability and validity of food safety culture assessment tools.

Heliyon

Faculty of Allied-Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 2HE, UK.

Published: June 2024

Since its recognition as a plausible direction to assure food safety, food safety culture research has evolved with several commercial and scientific assessment tools developed to evaluate the food safety culture in food businesses. However, existing research does not specify the validity and reliability checks required to demonstrate rigor in the tool development process and there is no unified methodology to confirm robustness of the tools to ensure trustworthiness and usefulness of findings and inferences generated. The purpose of the study was to develop a method to evaluate food safety culture assessment tools and to assess the reliability and validity of existing food safety culture assessment tools using the developed method. Eleven elements were found to be key in validating food safety culture assessment tools. Of the eight tools assessed, only one tool (CT2) was validated on each of the elements. The depth of validation strategies differed for each tool. Three out of the five commercial tools published peer reviewed publications that demonstrated the validation checks that were done. Face validation, and pilot testing were evident and appeared to be done the most. Whilst content, ecological, and cultural validity were the least validated for scientific tools, factor analysis and reliability checks were the least evaluated for commercial tools. None of the tools were assessed for postdictive validity, concurrent validity and the correlation coefficient relating to construct validity. Having an established science-based approach is key as it provides a way to determine the trustworthiness of established assessment tools against accepted methods.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11252860PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32226DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

food safety
28
safety culture
24
assessment tools
24
culture assessment
16
tools
12
reliability validity
8
food
8
tools developed
8
evaluate food
8
reliability checks
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!