Application of Systematic Review Methodology to Food and Feed Safety Assessments to Support Decision Making

Systematic reviews are commonly used in human health research to provide overviews of existing evidence pertinent to clearly formulated specific questions, using pre-specified and standardised methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report and analyse data from the studies that are included in the reviews. Formal systematic reviews have rarely been used in food and feed safety risk assessments and the existing systematic review methods in other disciplines may not be directly applicable in this field. This Guidance aims to assist the application of systematic reviews to food and feed safety risk assessments in support of decision making, by describing a framework for identifying the different types of question suitable for systematic review generated by the risk assessment process and for determining the need for systematic reviews when dealing with broad food and feed safety policy problems. The Guidance provides suggestions and examples for the conduct of eight key steps in the systematic review process (preparing a review, searching for studies, selecting studies for inclusion, collecting data from included studies, assessing the methodological quality of included studies, synthesising data from the studies, presenting data and results, and interpreting the results and drawing conclusions) for questions suitable for systematic reviews, taking into account issues that may be unique to food and feed safety. Due to its methodological rigor and its objective and transparent nature, systematic review methodology and its principles could provide additional value for answering well-formulated specific questions generated by the risk assessment process or other analytical frameworks in food and feed safety. Regular updates of this Guidance are foreseen in light of experience and new evidence both in food and feed safety and systematic review methodology.

[1]  Hilde Kruse,et al.  Opinion of the Scientific Committee on "A Harmonised Approach for Risk Assessment of Compounds which are both Genotoxic and Carcinogenic". Comments from the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety , 2005 .

[2]  H Stryhn,et al.  Meta-analysis of the effect of oral selenium supplementation on milk selenium concentration in cattle. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.

[3]  Joseph Lau,et al.  Application of systematic review methodology to the field of nutrition. , 2008, The Journal of nutrition.

[4]  Sally Hopewell,et al.  Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results. , 2009, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[5]  J M Sargeant,et al.  Pre‐harvest Interventions to Reduce the Shedding of E. coli O157 in the Faeces of Weaned Domestic Ruminants: A Systematic Review , 2007, Zoonoses and public health.

[6]  I R Dohoo,et al.  The REFLECT statement: reporting guidelines for randomized controlled trials in livestock and food safety: explanation and elaboration. , 2010, Journal of food protection.

[7]  J M Sargeant,et al.  Methodological quality and completeness of reporting in clinical trials conducted in livestock species. , 2009, Preventive veterinary medicine.

[8]  C. Dreyfus,et al.  Heavy browsing by a mammalian herbivore does not affect fluctuating asymmetry of its food plants , 2007 .

[9]  J. Glanville,et al.  Searching for Studies , 2008 .

[10]  M. Clarke,et al.  Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials. , 2002, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[11]  M Egger,et al.  Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. , 2007, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[12]  Geoff K Frampton,et al.  The effects on terrestrial invertebrates of reducing pesticide inputs in arable crop edges: a meta‐analysis , 2007 .

[13]  A. Pullin,et al.  Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[14]  Anthony Hardy,et al.  Opinion on a request from EFSA related to the default Q10 value used to describe the temperature effect on transformation rates of pesticides in soil 1 Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR-Panel) , 2007 .

[15]  T. Duffield,et al.  A meta-analysis of the impact of monensin in lactating dairy cattle. Part 1. Metabolic effects. , 2008, Journal of dairy science.

[16]  D. Hodgins,et al.  Mannheimia haemolytica and bovine respiratory disease , 2007, Animal Health Research Reviews.

[17]  David I. Warton,et al.  DO SMALL-SEEDED SPECIES HAVE HIGHER SURVIVAL THROUGH SEED PREDATION THAN LARGE-SEEDED SPECIES? , 2003 .

[18]  Jan M. Sargeant,et al.  A Guide to Conducting Systematic Reviews in Agri-Food Public Health , 2005 .

[19]  C. Kimmel,et al.  Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. II. Comparison of generic benchmark dose estimates with no observed adverse effect levels. , 1994, Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[20]  Michele Tarsilla Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

[21]  S. Thompson,et al.  How should meta‐regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  Julian Little,et al.  Systematic Reviews of Genetic Association Studies , 2009, PLoS medicine.

[23]  D. Gould,et al.  What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. , 2009, International journal of nursing studies.

[24]  G. Glass Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research1 , 1976 .

[25]  S. Funtowicz,et al.  Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Measures of Uncertainty in Model‐Based Environmental Assessment: The NUSAP System , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[26]  C. Scott Findlay,et al.  Meta-analysis of the impacts of water management on aquatic communities , 2008 .

[27]  A M O'Connor,et al.  Feeding management practices and feed characteristics associated with Salmonella prevalence in live and slaughtered market-weight finisher swine: a systematic review and summation of evidence from 1950 to 2005. , 2008, Preventive veterinary medicine.